alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 2507.14 Administrative appeals. Whenever AmeriCorps denies a FOIA request, it will inform the requester of the reasons for the denial and of the requester's right to appeal the denial to the FOIA Appeals Officer. ( a ) *What a requester may appeal.* A requester may appeal: ( 1 ) The withholding of a document or part of a document;
( 2 ) Denial of a fee waiver request;
( 3 ) The type or amount of fees they were charged;
( 4 ) Any other type of adverse determination under the FOIA; or
( 5 ) A failure by AmeriCorps to conduct an adequate search for the requested records.
( b ) *What a requester may not appeal.* A requester may not appeal the lack of a timely response.
( c ) *When appeal is required.* A requester must generally submit a timely administrative appeal before they seek court review of the Agency's adverse determination.
( d ) *Requirements for making an appeal.* A requester must: ( 1 ) Make the appeal in writing;
( 2 ) Transmit or postmark the appeal within 90 calendar days after the date of adverse determination;
( 3 ) Clearly identify the assigned request number and the Agency determination they are appealing;
( 4 ) Mark the subject line of the appeal email, or letter and envelope, with “FOIA Appeal.”
( e ) *Where to file an appeal.* A requester may file an appeal by sending an email to *foia@cns.gov* to the attention of the FOIA Appeals Officer, or a letter to: FOIA Appeals Officer, AmeriCorps, 250 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20525. There is no charge for filing an administrative appeal.
( f ) *Adjudication of appeals.* ( 1 ) The FOIA Appeals Officer will conduct *de novo* review and make the final determination on appeals.
( 2 ) An appeal ordinarily will not be adjudicated if the request becomes a matter of FOIA litigation.
( g ) *Decisions on appeals.* The FOIA Appeals Officer will provide the decision on any appeal in writing within 20 days (excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays) from the date the FOIA Appeals Officer received the appeal. The FOIA Appeals Officer's determination of an appeal constitutes the Agency's final action. ( 1 ) If the FOIA Appeals Officer's decision upholds the Agency's determination, the decision will: ( i ) State the reasons for the affirmance, including any FOIA exemptions applied;
( ii ) Notify the requester of their statutory right to file a lawsuit; and
( iii ) Inform the requester of the mediation services offered by OGIS as a non-exclusive alternative to litigation.
( 2 ) If the FOIA Appeals Officer's decision remands or modifies the Agency determination, either in whole or in part, they will notify the requester of that determination in writing. Thereafter, AmeriCorps will re-process the FOIA request in accordance with that determination and, if applicable, promptly send the releasable records to the requester, unless a reasonable delay is justified.
[87 FR 55309, Sept. 9, 2022; 87 FR 57643, Sept. 21, 2022]
From: Laureen Boles [ mailto:laureenboles@gmail.com ]

Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 5:05 PM Date of the Public Hearing in Philadelphia Testimony on Tier 3 Standards > My name is Laureen Boles. I am a civil engineer and environmental city > planner and a member of the Environmental Justice Leadership Forum on Climate Change. The Forum is a national coalition of 35 environmental justice organizations working together to inform state and f

ederal policy, as well as political and legislative action, toward the development of just policies and the equitable reduction of carbon emissions in all communities. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Tier 3 standards for Clean Vehicles and Clean Fuels. > > The EJLFCC supports those provisions of the Tier 3 standards that are consistent with the organizations mission. I caution that the credit trading provision of the standards, which are designed to offer flexibility during the transition t o more efficient vehicles and cleaner fuels, seems counterintuitive to uniform national standards

- and thereby uniform benefits. > > I propose that the success of the Tier 2 standards is well

- documented and all the transition we need. We casually speak o f trading credits. But if we look at the transaction closely, on one

- half of the transaction someone is holding a basket full of credits and on the other half a basket full of dis

- benefits. > > I ask that you examine the impact that credit trading has had on the success of Tier 2 standards, because all communities deserve equal protection and their share of benefits: > - GHG reductions > - Fuel savings > - Energy Security > - Mitigation of disproportionate adverse health impacts > - Economic growth > - Job Creation > > I applaud the work that you have done, as well as the effort that it takes to balance the protection of people, preservation of the planet, and promotion of economic prosperity. > > Thank you again for this opportunity.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 27, 2021

No. 04-21-00403-CR

Juan Ruben Sanchez CERDA,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-CRS-372

Jose Roberto (Bobby) Flores, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Jessie Salazar's Notification of Late Reporter's Record is hereby NOTED. Time is 

extended until October 25, 2021.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 27th day of September, 2021.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
NO. 07-06-0398-CR

NO. 07-06-0399-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

DECEMBER 12, 2006

______________________________

THERESE ANN LADD,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 251st DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNTY;

NOS. 17,294-C and 18,189-C; HON. PATRICK A. PIRTLE, PRESIDING

_______________________________

ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant appeals from her convictions. On November 21, 2006, the clerk’s record

in each case was filed. The reporter’s records were due on November 20, 2006. No

records or extension motions were filed by the court reporter. On November 27, 2006, this

court directed the court reporter by letter “to advise the Court of the status of the reporter’s

record on or before Thursday, December 07, 2006." To date, no response has been

received by the court.
2

Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the 251st District Court

of Potter County (trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall

immediately cause notice of a hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing to

determine the following:

1. why the reporter’s record in each case has not been filed,

2. when the reporter’s records can reasonably be filed in a manner that

does not further delay the prosecution of these appeals or have the

practical effect of depriving the appellant of their right to appeal, and,

3. whether an alternate or substitute reporter should or can be appointed

to complete the records in a timely manner.

The trial court shall cause the hearing to be transcribed. So too shall it 1) execute

findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing the foregoing issues, 2) cause to be

developed a supplemental clerk’s record in each case containing its findings of fact and

conclusions of law and all orders it may issue as a result of its hearing in this matter, and

3) cause to be developed a reporter’s record in each case transcribing the evidence and

arguments presented at the aforementioned hearing, if any. Additionally, the district court

shall then file the supplemental records and reporter’s records transcribing the hearing with

the clerk of this court on or before January 11, 2007. Should further time be needed by

the trial court to perform these tasks, then same must be requested before January 11,

2007.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
#### § 160.414 Limitations.

No action under this subpart may be entertained unless commenced by the Secretary, in accordance with § 160.420, within 6 years from the date of the occurrence of the violation.
§ 2525.220 What steps are necessary to use an education award to repay a qualified student loan? ( a ) *Required information.* Before disbursing an amount from an education award to repay a qualified student loan, AmeriCorps must receive: ( 1 ) An Eligible Individual's written authorization and request for a specific payment amount; and
( 2 ) Any identifying and other information from the loan holder as requested by AmeriCorps.
( b ) *Payment.* When AmeriCorps receives the information required under paragraph (a) of this section, it will pay the loan holder and notify the Eligible Individual of the payment.
( c ) *Aggregate payments.* AmeriCorps may establish procedures to aggregate payments to holders of loans for more than a single individual.
POSTFLIGHT FIELD CHECKLIST

1 / 1 | P a g e

PIC AIRCRAFT RELATED GSC RELATED

DESCRIPTION INITIALS DESCRIPTION INITIALS

Aircraft Landed and Secured Save Flight Logs

Aircraft Disarmed Print Actual Mission Flown

Payload Power Down Modify & Save Mission if Necessary

Aircraft Power Down Get Ready for Next Flight

Inspect Propellers for Condition GSC END OF DAY

Fill out Mission Card Power Down Flight & Payload Computers

Swap Batteries Remove Charging Batteries

Get Ready for Next Flight Power Down Battery Chargers

PIC END OF DAY Power Down Antenna Tracker

Disassemble and Remove Payload Disconnect Comms Equipment

Remove Flight Batteries Disconnect Shore Power

Breakdown Motor Booms Secure & Pack Equipment

Download Current Flight Logs

Pack Transmitter Equipment

Pack S900 Aircraft

Secure & Pack Equipment

Fill Out Appropriate Logs
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Shiner International, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), XueZhu Xu, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:      May 2, 2011
By:
/s/ XueZhu XuName: XueZhu XuTitle: Interim Chief Financial Officer








This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
## Draft Proposal CB-20

This concept has been developed by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) as a possible code

change proposal to the Commercial provisions of the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code

(IECC). Interested parties are asked to submit any and all comments on DOE's initial concepts and draft

code change proposals. For instructions on submitting comments, visit:

www.energycodes.gov/development/ commercial/codes/iecc/concepts/



## Minimum Skylight Fenestration Area (CB-20)

Objective: Clarify the language pertaining to requiring skylights in roofs covering areas greater than

10,000 ft 2

.

Suggested Code Change Proposal

Revise Section C402.3.2 as follows:

C402.3.2 Minimum skylight fenestration area. In an enclosed space greater than 10,000 square feet in

floor area directly under a roof with a at least 75% of ceiling area with heights greater than 15 feet, and

used as an office, lobby, atrium, concourse, corridor, storage space , gymnasium/exercise center,

convention center, automotive service area , space where manufacturing occurs , non-refrigerated

warehouse, retail store, distribution/sorting area, transportation depot , or workshop, the total daylight

zone under skylights shall be not less than half the floor area and shall provide a minimum skylight area

to daylight zone under skylights of either

1. Not less than at least 3 percent with a skylight when all skylights have a VT of at least 0.40 when

tested in accordance with NFRC 202, or

2. provide a minimum skylight effective aperture of at least 1 percent as determined in accordance

with Equation 4-1.

(Equation 4

‐ 1 remains unchanged.)

Exception: Skylights above daylight zones of enclosed spaces are not required in:

(Exceptions 1

‐ 4 remain unchanged.)

Reason: By definition skylights are fenestration such that the use of the term fenestration with skylights

is redundant. The intent is to address ceilings with variable heights and the proposed revision does that

by indicating the requirement applies when more than 75% of ceiling area is above 15 feet. Some of the

subject spaces referenced are not technically spaces or areas so the language has been enhanced to

convey the intent. Simplification is achieved by simply removing 1 and 2 and making them part of the

preceding sentence. While VT is defined, there is no referenced test method. NFRC 202 provides auniform test method by which VT can be objectively determined and should be referenced to enhance

uniformity of application and implementation of and compliance verification with the code.

Cost Impact: There is no cost impact associated with this proposed change because the current code

requires daylighting control. The exceptions are just not as clearly addressed in the current code as it is

in the code change proposal.
SERVED: December30, 2016 

# u.s. DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION. 

## DEPARTMENT OF OFFICE OFHEARINGS 

## TRANSPORTATION

InThe Matter Of: PUERTO RICO POLICE DEPARTMENT Respondent WASHINGTON, DC 

## ···1 1111



## . .· ... -5 A 

## 10: 23 ) ) ) ) ) ) 

## DOCKET OPERATIONS DocketNo. FAA-2013-1086
Case No. 2011SOi90181

,, ORDERSETTING A DEADLINE FORFILING RESPONSES TO MOTIONS AND A MOTION CONFERENCE OnOctober 13,2016, an Order Setting Litigation Dates and Procedures was filed. OnDecember 22, 2016, the Respondent, Puerto Rico Police Department, filed its Motion Requesting Extension ofTime. OnDecember 27,2016, the FAA filed its Motionto Compel. OnDecember 28,2016, the Office ofHearings attorney staffinformally contacted byemail the FAA and the Respondent to request their calendar availability for a telephone Motion Conference. Bothparties responded by e-mailwithin 24 hours and provided their calendar availability. Pursuant to 14 C.P.R.§ 13.205, and afterreviewing all relevant caselaw, regulation, statutory authority, and being fully advised; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. On orbefore Friday,January 6, 2017, the parties shall file theirresponses (ifany) to the pending Motions. The parties are reminded thatthe filing deadline is the date the document is due inthe Office ofHearings. (July 24,2014 Order.) The parties are strongly encouragedto file by fax a copy ofany docunient for the Judge's consideration.2. On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. Eastern time, the parties shall convene by telephone for a Motion Conference to discuss legal and procedural questions raised bythe parties' Motions. The parties shall access the conference by dialing 1-888-278-0296, and when prompted, entering access code 5851842.

Attachment: Service List

Page 2 of2

### Docket No. FAA-2013-1086 (Civil Penalty Action) 

### SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. 

### MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC--430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 1



### Mr. Christopher R. Stevenson Complainant's Counsel 

### Federal Aviation Administration ONE COPY



### Office ofthe ChiefCounsel, Enforcement Division 1701 Columbia Avenue College Park, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FAX: 404-305-5223 Ms. Nazihra M. Abdulrahman Soler Ms. Betmar R. Lopez Pagan Respondent's Counsel 

### Puerto Rico Police Department Office ofLegal Affairs P.O. Box 71200 San Juan, P.R. 00936 TEL: 787-793-1234 ext. 3067,2203 FAX: 787-781-7993 Judge J.E. Sullivan US. Administrative LawJudge 

### Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (El1:·310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
Exhibit 13.2
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (i)
    
    the accompanying annual report on Form 20-F of the Company for the year ended
March 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/
Vinod BhandawatName:
    Vinod BhandawatTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

REAR ADM. (RET) JAMES J. CAREY

et al.,

)

)

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 11-259 (RMC)

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )

)

Defendant. )

)

ORDER

For the reasons stated in the Memorandum Opinion filed simultaneously with this

Order, it is hereby

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Dkt. # 2] is

GRANTED as follows: The Commission shall not enforce 2 U.S.C. §§ 441a(a)(1)(C) & 441a(a)(3)

against Plaintiffs with regard to independent expenditures, as long as the National Defense Political

Action Committee maintains separate bank accounts for its “hard money” and “soft money,”

proportionally pays related administrative costs, and complies with the applicable monetary limits

of “hard money” contributions. 

SO ORDERED. 

Date: June 14, 2011 /s/ 

ROSEMARY M. COLLYER

United States District Judge 

-1-

Case 1:11-cv-00259-RMC Document 20 Filed 06/14/11 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 33.2**





**ASSESSMENT
      OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA**





Corporate
      Trust Services division of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (the
“Company”) is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria
      set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the Securities and
      Exchange Commission. The Company has determined that the servicing criteria
      are
      applicable in regards to the servicing platform as of and for the period as
      follows:





Platform :
      Publicly-issued ( *i* . *e* .,
      transaction-level reporting required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
      as amended) residential mortgage-backed securities and commercial
      mortgage-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006 for which the
      Company provides document custody services, excluding any publicly issued
      transactions issued by any government sponsored entity (the “Platform”).





Applicable
      Servicing Criteria :
      The
      servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i) and
      1122(d)(4)(ii), in regard to the activities performed by the Company with
      respect to the Platform (the “Applicable Servicing Criteria”). Management of the
      Company has determined that all other servicing criteria set forth in Item
      1122(d) are not applicable to the Platform.





Period :
      As of
      and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 (the “Period”).





With
      respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the following
      assessment of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:




1.
      The
      Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the Applicable
      Servicing Criteria.




2.
      The
      Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria. In
      performing this assessment, the Company used the criteria set forth by the
      Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation
      AB.




3.
      Based
      on such assessment, as of and for the Period, the Company has complied, in
      all
      material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.




KPMG
      LLP,
      a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report with
      respect to the Company’s assessment of compliance as of and for the
      Period.








**WELLS
      FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION**





s/ Shari
      L
      Gillund


Shari
      L.
      Gillund


Its:
      Senior Vice President


Dated:
      February 29, 2008
§ 263.1 How much State money must a State expend annually to meet the basic MOE requirement? ( a ) ( 1 ) The minimum basic MOE for a fiscal year is 80 percent of a State's historic State expenditures.
( 2 ) However, if a State meets the minimum work participation rate requirements in a fiscal year, as required under §§ 261.21 and 261.23 of this chapter, after adjustment for any caseload reduction credit under § 261.41 of this chapter, then the minimum basic MOE for that fiscal year is 75 percent of the State's historic State expenditures.
( 3 ) A State that does not meet the minimum participation rate requirements in a fiscal year, as required under §§ 261.21 and 261.23 of this chapter (after adjustment for any caseload reduction credit under § 261.41 of this chapter), but which is granted full or partial penalty relief for that fiscal year, must still meet the minimum basic MOE specified under paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( b ) The basic MOE level also depends on whether a Tribe or consortium of Tribes residing in a State has received approval to operate its own TANF program. The State's basic MOE level for a fiscal year will be reduced by the same percentage as we reduced the SFAG as the result of any Tribal Family Assistance Grants awarded to Tribal grantees in the State for that year.
BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

In tfae Matter of ) 

) All-06 

Audit Division Recommendation ) Agenda Document No. 12-48 

Memorandum on tfae Friends of Todd ) 

Young (FOTY) ) 

CERTIFICATION 

I, Shawn Woodhead Werth, recording secretary for the Federal Election Commission 

open meeting on June 21,2012, do hereby certify diat die Commission decided by a vote of 5-0 

to approve the Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on tfae Friends of Todd Young, as 

set fortfa in Agenda Document No. 12-48, with die amendment pursuant to the meeting 

discussion. 

Commissioners Bauerly, Hunter, McGahn II, Walther, and Weintraub voted afiirmatively 

for the decision. Commissioner Petersen did not vote. 

Attest: 

Date Shawn Woodhead Werth I 

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of : No. 107 DB 2022 (No. 43 RST 2022)

:

SARAH SEULA KANG : Attorney Registration No. 207432

:

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT :

 FROM INACTIVE STATUS : (Philadelphia)

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 29th day of September, 2022, the Report and Recommendation of 

Disciplinary Board Member dated August 21, 2022, is approved and it is ORDERED that

SARAH SEULA KANG, who has been on Inactive Status, has demonstrated that she has 

the moral qualifications, competency and learning in law required for admission to 

practice in the Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a 

member of the Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the 

investigation and processing of this matter shall be paid by the Petitioner.