alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 3- 35 20

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v. Eric L. Sm it h ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: Apri l 1 8, 2 01 4 Fil ed : Ap ril 29 , 20 14 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , BENTON andKELLY , Cir cu it Ju dg es .

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM. A jury co nv ic te d Eric L. Sm it h of at te m pt ed arm ed ba nk ro bb ery, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 21 13 (a), (d ); us e of a fir earm du rin g a cri m e of vi ol en ce, in vi ol at io n o f 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 4( c)(1 )(A)(i ii ); an d be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir ea r m, i nvi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( g) (1 ), 92 4( a)(2 ). The di st ric t co ur t se nt en ced hi m to 1 38 2 m on th s i n p ris on , fol lo wedby thre e y ears of s up erv is edrel eas e. Sm it h ap pe al s, ch al le ng in g th e su ffi ci en cy of th e ev id en ce to su pp or t hi s co nv ic ti on . He sp eci fic al ly at ta ck s th e po si ti ve id en ti fic at io n by a ba nk gu ard

. Viewi ng th e ev id en ce m os t fav or ab ly t o t h e jury’ s ve rd ic t, we co nc lu de it is su ffi ci en t. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Veg a , 67 6 F.3 d 70 8, 72 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w). The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed

. Se e 8t h C ir. R . 47 B.

The Hon or ab le Bet h Ph il li ps , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e f o r th e W es te rn 1 Dis tri ctof M is so ur i. -2

-
§ 172.548 DANGEROUS WHEN WET placard. ( a ) Except for size and color, the DANGEROUS WHEN WET placard must be as follows:
( b ) In addition to complying with § 172.519, the background color on the DANGEROUS WHEN WET placard must be blue. The letters in the words “WHEN WET” must be at least 25 mm (1.0 inches) high. The symbol, text, class number and inner border must be white.
[Amdt. 172-123, 56 FR 66263, Dec. 20, 1991]
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-1538

_____________________________

JOSE RENE CANO,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Coleman Lee Robinson, Judge.

June 13, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

KELSEY, WINOKUR, and NORDBY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Mr. Cano, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
§ 1.94 The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Is responsible for: ( a ) *In highway safety,* setting uniform guidelines for a coordinated national highway safety formula grant program carried out by the States and local communities; conducting research and development activities, including demonstration projects and the collection and analysis of highway and motor vehicle safety data and related information; administering highway safety grant programs to encourage State efforts in such areas as occupant protection, impaired and distracted driving, traffic safety data information system improvements, motorcyclist safety, child safety restraints, and graduated driver's licensing; determining State compliance with highway traffic safety law requirements; administering a nationwide high visibility enforcement program; administering the National Driver Register; and leading and coordinating efforts to establish, expand, and improve State, local, tribal, and regional emergency medical services and 9-1-1 systems.
( b ) *In motor vehicle safety,* establishing and enforcing safety standards and regulations for the manufacture and importation of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment; conducting research, development, and testing concerning motor vehicle safety, including vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure technologies and other new or advanced vehicle technologies; and investigating safety-related defects and non-compliance in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment and administering related recalls.
( c ) *In automobile fuel economy,* establishing automobile fuel economy standards for passenger and non-passenger automobiles and fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy vehicles.
( d ) *In consumer protection and information,* establishing requirements and carrying out programs for passenger motor vehicle information, such as the New Car Assessment Program; bumper standards for passenger motor vehicles; odometer requirements; and passenger motor vehicle theft prevention standards.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 16 (Thursday, January 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3414-3415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-320]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--AAF Association, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 12, 2006 pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 14 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), AAF Association, Inc. has 
filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General 
and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. 
The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Apple, Cupertino, 
CA; Konan Technology, Inc., Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; and SADiE, 
Cambridge, UNITED KINGDOM have withdrawn as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and AAF Association, Inc. intends to 
file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in 
membership.

[[Page 3415]]

    On March 28, 2000, AAF Association, Inc. filed its original 
notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of 
Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 
6(b) of the Act on June 29, 2000 (65 FR 40127).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on October 6, 
2006. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on November 22, 2006 (71 FR 67642).

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 07-320 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
§ 1.92 The Maritime Administration. Is responsible for: ( a ) Fostering the development and maintenance of a United States merchant marine sufficient to meet the needs of the national security and of the domestic and foreign commerce of the United States;
( b ) Operating the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in order to train officers for the Nation's merchant marine;
( c ) Promoting development of ports and intermodal transportation systems through investments in port infrastructure via grant programs and America's Marine Highway program;
( d ) Promoting the growth and modernization of the U.S. merchant marine and U.S. shipyards by administering loan and guarantee programs;
( e ) Overseeing the administration of cargo preference statutes;
( f ) Maintaining custody of, operating, and preserving ships in the National Defense Reserve Fleet as well as other vessels under the custody of MARAD and managing, maintaining and operating its Ready Reserve Force component;
( g ) Conducting research and development to improve and promote the waterborne commerce of the United States.
§ 179.500-17 Marking. ( a ) Each tank shall be plainly and permanently marked, thus certifying that tank complies with all requirements of this specification. These marks shall be stamped into the metal of necked-down section of tank at marked end, in letters and figures at least 1 ⁄ 4 inch high, as follows: ( 1 ) Spec. DOT-107A * * * *, the * * * * to be replaced by figures indicating marked test pressure of the tank. This pressure shall not exceed the calculated maximum marked test pressure permitted, as determined by the formula in § 179.500-4(b).
( 2 ) Serial number immediately below the stamped mark specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( 3 ) Inspector's official mark immediately below the stamped mark specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( 4 ) Name, mark (other than trademark), or initials of company or person for whose use tank is being made, which shall be recorded with the Bureau of Explosives.
( 5 ) Date (such as 1-01, for January 2001) of tank test, so placed that dates of subsequent tests may easily be added.
( 6 ) Date (such as 1-01, for January 2001) of latest test of pressure relief device or of the rupture disc, required only when tank is used for transportation of flammable gases.
( b ) [Reserved]
[29 FR 18995, Dec. 29, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 179-52, 61 FR 28682, June 5, 1996; 66 FR 45391, Aug. 28, 2001]
From: tcasey@myrealbox.com [mailto:tcasey@myrealbox.com] 

Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 11:36 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 24, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Timothy Casey 

2330 12th Avenue 

Clarkston, WA 99403
-----Original Message----- 

From: shafferrw@yahoo.com [mailto:shafferrw@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 8:11 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 24, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Susanne Shaffer 

1223 Heritage Ct 

Los Altos,, CA 94024
EXHIBIT
32.1



CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT
TO

18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I,
Manfred F. Dyck, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that the Quarterly Report of Hydromer, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the six months ended December 31, 2012 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such report
fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Hydromer, Inc.





|Date: February
     15, 2013 | Hydromer                         
|---------------------------- | ---------------------------------
|                             | By: /s/ Manfred F. Dyck          
|                             | Manfred F. Dyck President and CEO
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, July 20, 1995 (98), Para 98.13 Recorded Vote]
[Page 1164]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.98.13  recorded vote

  A recorded vote by electronic device was ordered in the Committee of 
the Whole on the following amendment submitted by Mr. ALLARD:

       Page 2, line 11, strike ``$10,227,000, of which 
     $7,500,000'' and insert, ``$9,204,300, of which $6,750,000''.
       Page 3, line 3, strike ``$3,748,000'' and insert 
     ``$3,373,200''.
       Page 3, line 15, strike ``$5,899,000'' and insert 
     ``$5,309,100''.
       Page 3, line 21, strike ``$4,133,000'' and insert 
     ``$3,719,700''.
       Page 4, line 19, strike ``$596,000'' and insert 
     ``$536,400''.
       Page 5, line 23, strike ``$800,000'' and insert 
     ``$720,000''.
       Page 7, line 19, strike ``$3,797,000'' and insert 
     ``$3,607,150''.
       Page 8, line 3, strike ``$8,198,000'' and insert 
     ``$7,378,200''.
       Page 9, line 3, strike ``$27,860,000'' and insert 
     ``$26,467,000''.
       Page 9, line 12, strike ``$520,000'' and insert 
     ``$468,000''.
       Page 9, line 17, strike ``$53,131,000'' and insert 
     ``$50,474,450''.
       Page 10, line 3, strike ``$81,107,000'' and insert 
     ``$77,051,650''.

It was decided in the

Yeas

196

negative

Nays

232
```
Regulatory Evaluation



### DocketNo. FAA-TBD Directorate Identifier: 

### TBD-AD 

## If

you make changes to the values in the table below, you mustensure the totals update accordingly, 

## If they do not, click (or Tab) into andthen out of the changedcell.
Estimated Costs: Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, (e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor+ 

## u.s. for U.S. Fleet Donot include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered and close-up) om) Products Inspection 

### and removal ofaffected 3.0 

## s .::55.00**:~,** 

### .::s:>.ot. 200 S::' l.OU(,_:)t1 

### part



### .,. D.CG $ 

## o_no c.; iJ-'JU 

## " I \).!}I) I 0.00 

## s j)_ij(j $ 0.00 $ 0.00 ') :J.r;i;**~** D.OC $ O.ilO 

## s 0.00 ' 

### ' (,' (}(J $ i}i)(j 

## s O.Oil $ 0. (}i) 

# ' O.UG 

## s o.uu $ o_rjO $ O.IJQ 

## s O.OU 

## :s OJ•I) 

### I G.UC' 

## s l).t'iO I ' 

### o.no $ ()_(1(, 

## s O.tK I ().()(} 

### .I 0.00 

## s t)_il(J $ i:.G0 .'j; 

## o.nu s I!.('\.'
c 

## " l}(•f; I 

## o.ro '

## ' ll.OC 

# s 0.1!0 

### " 0.01) 

## s •J.CU 

### ' 

## ,. 

## " 0.00 

# ., 0. l)i) 

## s O.Ot· $ i\00 I Q_()i) 

### ::: .)J)Ij 

### ,:; f).()Q**·~** {)_()!) ::; (j ,I)I; 

### I \i.I!C 

### -s 

## o.on 

## s •}_()i) 

# ., ' U.iji)**-~** ()_l)() 

# ,, ::_\)\] 'I 

### o.nu**-~** 0.00 

# s ,_._li•)
The known number ofproducts in compliance: 

### 0 Total Costs ofcomuliance for 

### U.S. fleet: $51,000 Costs covered under warranty 

### (if 

### known) $0
On-Condition Costs: Action**Work~hours** Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product (e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hom) testing, and close- replacement) up) $ ()_')() :5 --,_._;(, 

## ·s {)-\)() _-s .:'. ·)i 

# ' (L)(; 

# ' ()_(_)() 

## s •j\ Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use thisfield to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or mightnot be obvious. Thisfield can also be usedto explain warranty costs):

### Executive Order 12866: Could the AD be considered a "significantregulatory action"? -· YES'

# D NOIZ] *Explanation: 

### DOT RegulatoryPolicies and Procedures:
Is the AD significant? '- YES'

# D NOIZ] *Explanation: 

### RegulatoryFlexibilityAct: Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities? Explain for either a Yes or No answer.- YES 

# D NOIZ] Explanation: 

### Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is 

### it appropriate to include specificrequirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode oftransportation?

- YES'

# D NOIZ] *Explanation:
§ 178.33c-2 Variation. Notwithstanding the variation provided in this section, each container must otherwise conform to a DOT 2P container in accordance with § 178.33. The following conditions also apply under Variation 1— ( a ) *Manufacture.* Side seams: not permitted. Ends: The ends shall be designed to withstand pressure and be equipped with a pressure relief system (e.g., rim-venting release or a dome expansion device) designed to function prior to bursting of the container.
( b ) *Tests.* ( 1 ) One out of each lot of 25,000 containers or less, successively produced per day complete with ends assembled (and without a pressure relief system assembled) shall be pressure tested to destruction at gauge pressure and must not burst below 240 psig. For containers with a pressure relief system as described in paragraph (a) of this section and assembled, failure at a location other than the pressure relief system will reject the lot. For containers with an end expansion device, the lot must be rejected if the container bursts prior to buckling of the device.
( 2 ) Each such 25,000 containers or less, successively produced per day, shall constitute a lot and if the test container(s) shall fail, the lot shall be rejected. Otherwise, ten (10) additional containers of each container design produced may be selected at random and subjected to the test. These containers shall be complete with ends assembled. Should any of the containers thus tested fail, the entire lot must be rejected. All containers constituting a lot shall be of like material, size, design construction, finish, and quality.
( c ) *Marking.* By means of printing, lithographing, embossing, or stamping, each container must be marked: ( 1 ) DOT-2P1.
( 2 ) With the name or symbol of the person making the mark. A symbol, if used, must be registered with the Associate Administrator.
[81 FR 3685, Jan. 21, 2016]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Fred B. Roof, Appellant.

*People*v. *Roof,*138 App. Div. 633, affirmed.

(Argued October 13, 1910;

decided October 28, 1910.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered March 8, 1910, which affirmed a judgment of the Chenango County Court rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of robbery in the first degree.

*William H. Sullivan*for appellant.

*James P.*Hill, *District*Attorney, for respondent.

Judgment of conviction affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gbay, Weenee, Willabd Babtlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ.
§ 178.1015 General Flexible Bulk Container standards. ( a ) Each Flexible Bulk Containers must be sift-proof and completely closed during transport to prevent the release of contents and waterproof.
( b ) Parts of the Flexible Bulk Container that are in direct contact with hazardous materials: ( 1 ) Must not be affected or significantly weakened by those hazardous materials.
( 2 ) Must not cause a dangerous effect with the dangerous goods (e.g., catalyzing a reaction or reacting with the hazardous materials).
( 3 ) Must not allow permeation of the hazardous materials that could constitute a danger under conditions normally incident to transportation.
( c ) Filling and discharge devices must be so constructed as to be protected against damage during transport and handling. The filling and discharge devices must be capable of being secured against unintended opening.
( d ) Slings of the Flexible Bulk Container, if fitted with such, must withstand pressure and dynamic forces which can be expected under conditions normally incident to transportation.
( e ) Handling devices must be strong enough to withstand repeated use.
( f ) A venting device must be fitted to Flexible Bulk Containers intended to transport hazardous materials that may develop dangerous accumulation of gases within the Flexible Bulk Container. Any venting device must be designed so that external foreign substances or the ingress of water are prevented from entering the Flexible Bulk Container through the venting device under conditions normally incident to transportation.
[78 FR 1097, Jan. 7, 2013, as amended at 82 FR 15896, Mar. 30, 2017]
From: obmaj@insightbb.com [mailto:obmaj@insightbb.com] 

Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 11:05 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 24, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

rita butler 

4645 Cliff ave 

Louisville, KY 40215
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 4
Federal Reserve Bank of: Cleveland

## Filings received during the week ending February 22, 2014

|Filer             | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                     | End of Comment Period                              
|----------------- | -------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|FIFTH THIRD BANK  | * Branch       | Application by Fifth Third Bank, Cincinnati, Oh to establish a branch at 8001 Golf Road, Niles, IL. | Newspaper:02/28/2014Federal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:        | 02/28/2014    
|Federal Register: | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for Second Quarter of 2014 (April 1, 2014 - June 30, 2014)

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
[Rockingham,

June, 1881.]

#### School-Districts 4 and 5 in Hampstead v. Eastman *& a.*

*Gr. O. <f G. K. Bartlett*and *Wiggin,*for the plaintiffs.

*Sawyer f Sawyer,*Jr., for the defendants.

Petition, for a writ of *certiorari*to quash the proceedings of a board of selectmen and school committee changing the lines of school-districts. G. L., *c.*86, *s.*9. Facts found by a referee. The petition was granted, and the proceedings were quashed for the disqualification of a member of the board.

All concurred.
#### Milton H. Robertson, *Respondent, v.*Samuel Schuyler, *Appellant.*

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event, unless plaintiff stipulate within twenty days after iiotiee of decision to deduct the sum mentioned in opinion, with interest from the amount of the judgment, in which event the judgment as so modified affirmed, without costs. Opinion by

Daniels, J.