alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SAT Report

PMN Number: P-14-0204

SAT Date: 1/10/2014

Print Date: 6/4/2014

Related cases:

Concern levels:

Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments

Level of Concern: 2 3

 Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments

1 21

Exposure Based Review:

Health: No

Ecotox: Yes

Routes of exposure: Health: Dermal Inhalation 

Ecotox: All releases to water

Fate: ;

Keywords:

 Keywords: IRR/CORR-S,E,L,MM; AQUATOX

Summary of Assessment:

 Fate:

Fate Summary: P-14-0202-06

FATE: Estimations for typical low weight 

log Kow = 7.72 (E) 

S = 0.005 mg/L at 25 C (E)

BP > 400 C (E)

H = 1.79E-8 (E)

log Koc = 6.20 (E)

log Fish BCF = 3.17 (E)

EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 2
log Fish BAF = 5.07 (E) 

POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk-mo

Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong

PBT Potential: P1B2

*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

 Health:

 Health Summary: Absorption is poor from the skin, moderate from the GI 

tract, and good from the lung (analog). Concern for severe irritation and possible corrosion from 

the 

 Ecotox:

Test Organism Test 

Type

Test End 

Point

Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 *

daphnid 48-h LC50 *

green algal 96-h EC50 0.011

fish _ chronic value 0.002

daphnid _ chronic 

value

0.004

algal _ chronic 

value

0.005

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50 _

Sewage Sludge _ Chronic 

Value

_

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for ; SAR 

chemical class = MW 400; log Kow = 6.0 (EPI); with mp unknown (P); 

S = 0.24 mg/L or dispersible (P); effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and 

mean measured concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments

Assessment Factor 10

Concentration of Concern 

(ppb)

1

SARs

SAR Class

Ecotox Category 

Ecotox Factors Comments: 

 SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 2
|                          |
|--------------------------|
|                          |  |  |
|                     |   | (Signed)  "Nahla Boury" |
|                     |   | Name:  Nahla Boury, P.Eng |
|                     |   | Title:    Vice President Engineering and Director |
|                     |   | DeGolyer and MacNaughton Canada Limited |
|                     |   |   |
| Calgary, Alberta, Canada |   |   |
| March 14, 2013           |   |   |
|                     |   |   |
|                     |   |   |
# 

# BILL OF COSTS

## TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, TENTH DISTRICT, AT WACO

No. 10-14-00325-CV

**RR Prince Ranch SWD LTD.**

**v.**

**William O. Wiley, Shirley Wiley and William O. Wiley d/b/a WEN-BE**

(No. NOT-14-12 IN 369th District Court OF Leon COUNTY)

**Balance of costs owing to the Tenth Court of Appeals, Waco, Texas:  $5.00**

***Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.***

I, **SHARRI ROESSLER, CLERK** OF THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

**IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF,**witness my hand and the Seal of the **COURT OF APPEALS**for the Tenth District of Texas, this December 16, 2015.

SHARRI ROESSLER, CLERK

By:___________________________

Nell Hegefeld, Deputy Clerk
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (i)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 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.
 Dated: August 27, 2010
    /s/ GARY H. SCHOENFELDGary H. SchoenfeldPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Director
Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc.
(Principal Executive Officer)Dated: August 27, 2010
    /s/ MICHAEL L. HENRYMichael L. HenrySr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc.
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(A)

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Kevin Farragher, certify that:

1. I have reviewed the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal period ended October 31, 2008 of CurrencySharesSMRussian Ruble Trust;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the
effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on
such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and PADCO Advisors II, Inc.s auditors and the board of directors of PADCO Advisors II, Inc. and the board of directors of Rydex Fund Services, Inc. and the audit committee of Rydex
Specialized Products LLCs board of managers (or persons performing equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves persons who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.

Date: January 29, 2009



|                             
|-----------------------------
|/s/ KEVIN FARRAGHER          
|Kevin Farragher              
|Chief Executive Officer      
|(principal executive officer)
From: acura_previa@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: acura_previa@yahoo.com

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:18:35 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

William Bistak

Sheffield Lake, OH 44054
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the annual report of Cemtrex, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K
for the year ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Arun Govil, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
the best of my knowledge and belief:





(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 result of operations of the
      Company.





/s/ Arun GovilArun
      GovilChief
      Executive Officerand
      principal executive officerJanuary
      13, 2010





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
No. 64501.

#### Acme Distributing Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests *959656-G,*etc. (Los Angeles).

*255Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Before the First Division,

November 15, 1968

No. P68/486.

protests 65/1741, etc. (New York).

No. P68/487.

protests 66/27854 (New York).

#### Marmax Trading Corp. *v.*United States,

#### Marmax Trading Corp. *v.*United States,

Newman, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of plastic cases or containers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Marmax Trading Corp.*v. *United States*(58 Cust. Ct. 255, C.D. 2955), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: discounts@emypeople.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:19:04 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Timothy Horst

East Dublin, GA 31027
Case No. 14,178.

#### TRIPLETT et al. v. BANK OF WASHINGTON.

[3 Cranch. C. C. 646.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Nov. Term, 1829.

Evidence — Bank Books.

A call for all tin letter-books of the bank from its institution to the time when the cause of action arose, was held to be too general. The court will compel the production of sucli only as they are satisfied contain evidence pertinent to the issue. The party calling foi books has no right to examine them before the trial, to see whether there be not something in them pertinent to the issue.

Upon the venire de novo issued under the mandate, of the supreme court, in this case (see 1 Pet. [2G U. S.] 25), the plaintiffs had given notice to the bank (the defendant,) to produce at the trial the letter-books of the bank, from its institution down to tbe year 1S25. to be used in evidence.

*203[See Case No., 951.]

Mr. Key, for the defendants,

objected that the notice was still too general. It does not show that there are any such letters. It is merely to enable the plaintiffs to find possible evidence.

THE COURT

(MORSELL, Circuit Judge, absent,

on account of the death of his brother), said that the call was too general, and that the bank ought not to be compelled to produce them unless the plaintiffs should first satisfy the court that they • contained evidence pertinent to the issue; and then thej' could be compelled to produce only such as they show to be pertinent.

•Mr. Neale contended that he had a right to examine them before the trial, to see whether there were not something in them pertinent to the issue. .

But THE COURT said he had no such right. The plaintiffs then gave notice to the defendants to produce, at the trial, the letter-books of the bank which contain their letters to their dealers, notifying them of the acceptance or non-acceptance of such drafts, payable after date, as have been sent to the bank for collection; and also such letter-books as contain their letters notifying their dealers that individuals had not been found by the officers of the bank on whom drafts had been drawn payable after date, and sent to the bank for collection; and moved the court to order the defendants to produce those books.

THE COURT refused to make the order; not being satisfied that the books contained any matter pertinent to the issue, (no particular letter being designated,) and not being of opinion that the plaintiff has a right to inspect the books for the purpose-of ascertaining whether they contained any such matter. The cause was tried. Verdict for defendant. Exceptions taken to the rejection of evidence, but no important point of law decided by the court.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 367 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 367

 Commemorating the 25th anniversary of the construction and dedication 
                   of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 2, 2007

Mr. Sali submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
   Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on 
      Natural Resources and Veterans' Affairs, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Commemorating the 25th anniversary of the construction and dedication 
                   of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Whereas 2007 marks the 25th anniversary of the construction and dedication of 
        the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, the District of Columbia;
Whereas the memorial displays the names of more than 58,000 men and women who 
        lost their lives between 1956 and 1975 in the Vietnam combat area or are 
        still missing in action;
Whereas every year millions of people in the United States visit the monument to 
        pay their respects to those who served in the Armed Forces;
Whereas the Vietnam Veterans Memorial has been a source of comfort and healing 
        for Vietnam veterans and the families of the men and women who died 
        while serving their country; and
Whereas the memorial has come to represent a legacy of healing and demonstrates 
        the appreciation of the people of the United States for those who made 
        the ultimate sacrifice: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved,  That the House of Representatives--
            (1) expresses its support and gratitude for all of the men 
        and women who served honorably in the Armed Forces of the 
        United States in defense of freedom and democracy during the 
        Vietnam War;
            (2) extends its sympathies to all people in the United 
        States who suffered the loss of friends and family in Vietnam;
            (3) encourages the people of the United States to remember 
        the sacrifices of the Nation's veterans; and
            (4) commemorates the 25th anniversary of the construction 
        and dedication of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.
                                 <all>
```
H. Res. 214

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 7, 2007.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 

the bill (H.R. 569) to amend the Federal Water Pollution 

Control Act to authorize appropriations for sewer overflow 

control grants. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 

with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are 

waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. 

General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman 

and ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. After general debate the bill shall 

be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It 

shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure now printed in 
2

•HRES 214 EH 

the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. Notwithstanding clause 11 

of rule XVIII, no amendment to the committee amendment 

in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those 

printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated 

for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII and except pro 

forma amendments for the purpose of debate. Each amendment so printed may be offered only by the Member who 

caused it to be printed or his designee and shall be considered 

as read. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 

amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to 

the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. 

Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on 

any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to 

the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a 

substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 

without intervening motion except one motion to recommit 

with or without instructions. 

Attest:

Clerk.
#### Town of Kirkwood, Appellant, v. David Newbury and others, Respondents.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
Before the First Division,

July 29, 1958

No. 62209.

#### Williams, Clarke Co., a/c The American Import Company *v.*United States,

protest 245734-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of rattan core blind material, composed wholly or in chief value of rattan core or reed, the same in all material respects as that the subject of Abstract 59235, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 69198.

#### New York Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 64/7326 (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Nichols, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of plastic back scratchers the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 161, C.D. 2218), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.