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

CLUB 

FOUNDED 1892 

August 3, 2015 

Scott Mathias 

Associate Director 

Air Quality Policy Division 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Research Triangle Park, NC 277 1 I 

Re: Air Dispersion Modeling of Georgia Sulfur Dioxide Pollution 

Dear Mr. Mathias: 

Air dispersion modeling recently conducted by Wingra Engineering, S.C. 011 

behalf of the Sierra Club demonstrates that sui fur dioxide (""S02 ") emissions fi·om 

Georgia Power's Scherer Plant in Georgia has caused downwind S02 ambient air 

concentrations to exceed the 75 parts per billion National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

( .. NAAQS"). 

Enclosed, please find the results of the modeling analysis, along with the 

corresponding modeling input and output files. 

We urge EPA to consider this infonnation as it undertakes area designations in 

Georgia for the 2010 revised primary S02 NAAQS. This infonnation is being provided 

to both EPA Region 4 and to appropriate personnel at Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources. In the meantime, please let me know if l can provide any additional 

information. 

Thank you for your attention to and consideration of this matter, and please do not 

hesitate to contact me if you would like to discuss further. 
Mr. Scott Mathias 

;\ ugust 3, 2015 

Page 2 

Sincerely, 

Is/ Diana Csank 

Diana Csank 

Staff Attorney 

Sien·a Club 

50 F Street, NW, 8th Floor 

Washington, DC 2000 I 

(202) 548-4595 

Diana. Csank@sierracl ub.org
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 14

- 00076

- CV
Champion Energy Services, LLC

v. City of Weslaco
On Appeal from the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Cause No. C

- 3865

- 10

- I

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considere d this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Jan uary 15, 2015
Exhibit 23








                       Consent of Independent Accountants





The Board of Directors
Xanser Corporation:

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
numbers  333-101996,  333-87446,  333-83970,  333-83968,  333-68558,  333-34496,
333-60195,  333-22109,  333-14071,  333-14069,  333-14067, 333-08727, 333-08725,
333-08723,  33-58981, 33-54027 and 33-41295 on Form S-8 of Xanser Corporation of
our report dated  February 25, 2003,  with respect to the  consolidated  balance
sheets of Xanser  Corporation  as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the related
consolidated  statements of income,  changes in stockholders'  equity,  and cash
flows for each of the years in the  three-year  period ended  December 31, 2002,
and all related  financial  statement  schedules,  which  report  appears in the
December 31, 2002, annual report on Form 10-K of Xanser Corporation.  Our report
refers to a change in accounting for goodwill in 2002.


                                    KPMG LLP



Dallas, Texas
March 28, 2003
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v REUBEN JACKSON, Private First Class, U. S. Army, Appellant

17 USCMA 48, 37 CMR 312

No. 19,892

May 19, 1967

*Colonel Daniel T. Ghent, Major David J. Passamaneck,*and *Captain Raymond A. DiLuglio*were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Colonel Peter S.. Wondolowski, Lieutenant Colonel David Rarick,*and *Major John F. Webb, Jr.,*were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

The decision of the board of review is affirmed. United States v Simpson, 17 USCMA 44, 37 CMR 308.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Joint Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted via teleconference. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Wednesday, February 7, 2007, at 1 p.m. Eastern Time. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Barbara Toy at 1-888-912-1227, or (414) 231-2360. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988)                           ( print page 1805)                        that an open meeting of the Joint Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (TAP) will be held Wednesday, February 7, 2007, at 1 p.m. Eastern Time via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the Joint Committee of TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or (414) 231-2360, or write Barbara Toy, TAP Office, MS-1006-MIL, PO Box 3205, Milwaukee, WI 53201-2105, or FAX to (414) 231-2363, or you can contact us at                     *http://www.improveirs.org*. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Barbara Toy.                 

The agenda will include the following: Discussion of issues and responses brought to the joint committee, office report, and discussion of next meeting. 

Dated: January 8, 2007. 

John Fay, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E7-383 Filed 1-12-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Before the Second Division,

August 29, 1945

No. 50432.

#### Protest 37796-K of L. Oppleman, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The uncontradicted evidence disclosed that the thermometer cases in question are similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 42789, which record was incorporated herein. In accordance therewith the claim at 40 percent under paragraph 339 was sustained.
No. 64846.

#### The American Import Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 207860-K, etc. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bamboo poles similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 59620, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 63084.

#### Arthur J. Humphreys *v.*United States,

protest 226840-K (Seattle).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fresh or frozen boneless pork similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 59714, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Luna Innovations Incorporated (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dale E. Messick, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(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.

This certification accompanies
this Report to which it relates, shall not be deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ DALE E. MESSICK                                  
|Dale E. Messick                                      
|Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer)

May 16, 2011
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KENNETH MILLS, No. CIV S-04-1649-DFL-CMK

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to

Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On November 3, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections

to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. Plaintiff has not filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. 

/ / /

Case 2:04-cv-01649-DFL -CMK Document 14 Filed 02/01/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 3, 2005, are adopted in

full;

2. This action is dismissed for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with

court orders and rules;

3. All pending motions are denied as moot; and

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file.

DATED: 1/31/2006

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01649-DFL -CMK Document 14 Filed 02/01/06 Page 2 of 2
} . 

### SERVED: SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF CEBU AIR INC., d/b/a Cebu Pacific Air, Inc. DOCKET NO. FAA 2014-0414 (Civil Penalty Action)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL Respondent filed a Request to withdraw Request for Hearing dated September 12,2014. 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.215 states: "Atany time before orduring a hearing, an agency attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing without the consent ofthe administrative lawjudge. Ifan agency attorney withdraws the complaint or a pmiy withdraws the request for a hearing and the answer, the administrative lawjudge shall dismiss the proceedings under this subpart withprejudice." WHEREFORE, Respondent's Requestto withdraw Request for Hearing having been read and considered itbe and is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. Respondent's withdrawal ofRequest for Hearing be and is hereby granted; and 2. This proceedingbe and is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

·······':;···
"!

. . • ...**;~/.~ -~·** ...... " Richard C. Goodwin U.S. Administrative LawJudge Attachment

- Service ListSERVICE 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 WilburWright Building-Suite 2W1000 1 ONE COPY Lance Y. Gokongwei, President/CEO CEBU Air, Inc. (CEBU PACIFIC), Respondent 8006 Airline Operations Center Domestic Road, Pasay City Philippines 1301 TEL: +632-854-0226 Rick Feller, President U-FREIGHTAMERICA, INC. 320 Corey Way San Francisco, CA 94080 TEL: 650-583-6527 Carey Terasaki, Complainant's Counsel Office ofthe Regional Counsel, APW-7.1 Federal Aviation Administration Western-Pacific Region PO Box 92007 Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 TEL: 310-725-7108 FAX: 310-725-6816 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 Docket No. FAA-2014-0414 (Civil Penalty Action)

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 2WI000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. · 2
No. 50435.

#### Protests 101616-K, etc. of M. Pressner & Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The uncontradicted evidence showed that the darts are similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 49053, which record was incorporated herein. In accordance therewith the claim at 33)4 percent under paragraph 412 was sustained.
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 22

- 00008

- CV

JOEL R . LAMBRIGHT, JR. , Appellant

V.

C.R. WILKERSON , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Rusk County, Texas

Trial Court No. C21

- 022

Before Morriss, C.J., Stevens and Carter

, * JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss

____________________ *Jack Carter, Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment2 

### ME MORANDUM OPINION

Joel R. Lambright, Jr. , appellant, filed a notice of appeal in this matt er on February 1 1

,

20 2 2

. The clerk’s record was due to be filed in this case on or before March 28 , 202 2

.

Appellant is not indigent and is thus responsible for paying or making adequate arrangements to

pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the record. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 37.3(b). The county c lerk has

informed this Court that the fee has not been paid for preparation of the clerk’s record.

By letter dated April 11 , 20 2 2

, Appellant w as provided with notice of and an opportunity

to cure th is defect. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(b) , (c)

. The April 11 letter further warned Appellant

that, if he did not submit an adequate response to the notice by April 21

, 20 2 2

, t his appeal would

be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution and for failure to comply with the ab ove

- cited

r ules

. Appellant ha s not paid for preparation of the clerk’s record and ha s not file d proof of

indigency. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 20.1. Further, w e have received no communication from

Appellant responsive to the April 11 correspondence

. According ly, this appeal is ripe for

dismissal.

Pursuant to Rule 42.3 , subsections (b) and (c)

, of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure,

we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date S ubmitted: May 2 , 2022

Date Decided: May 3 , 2022
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HAROLD LEE BRITTON, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0472 LKK GGH P

vs.

JEANNE S. WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested a 14-day extension of time to file and serve an opposition

to the defendants’ June 29, 2005 motion to dismiss. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s July 29, 2005 motion for an extension of time is granted; and

2. Plaintiff is granted an extension of time until August 12, 2005 in which to file

and serve an opposition to the defendants’ June 29, 2005 motion to dismiss. Defendants’ reply,

if any, shall be filed seven days thereafter.

DATED: 8/10/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009/bb

brit0472.36 

Case 2:04-cv-00472-LKK-GGH Document 35 Filed 08/10/05 Page 1 of 1
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 Quarterly Report of m-Wise, Inc. ("the Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Zach Sivan, Chief
Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:





(1)  the Report fully
comply 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/ Zach SivanZach
      Sivan, Chief Executive OfficerDated:
      November 13, 2009
[Cite as Isreal v. Franklin Cty. Clerk, 2021-Ohio-400.]

{¶1} Requester Michael Isreal has sued the Franklin County Clerk of Court, 

seeking “specific public information” in the care of the Franklin County Clerk of Court. A 

special master recommends (1) dismissal of Isreal’s complaint for lack of jurisdiction 

and (2) assessment of court costs to Isreal. (Recommendation to Dismiss, December 

10, 2020.) 

{¶2} On January 5, 2021, Isreal filed a document, which has been described as 

an objection to the special master’s recommendation on the Court’s docket. The Court 

finds that Isreal’s objection lacks merit. The Court further finds the special master’s 

recommendation is well-taken. 

{¶3} Under R.C. 2743.75(D), notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in 

R.C. 2743.75, “upon the recommendation of the special master, the court of claims on 

its own motion may dismiss the complaint at any time.” Accordingly, upon the special 

master’s recommendation, and having found well taken the special master’s

MICHAEL ISREAL 

 Requester 

 v. 

FRANKLIN COUNTY CLERK 

 Respondent 

Case No. 2020-00680PQ 

Judge Dale A. Crawford 

DECISION AND ENTRY 
Case No. 2020-00680PQ -2- DECISION & ENTRY 

recommendation, the Court sua sponte DISMISSES Isreal’s complaint. Court costs are 

assessed against Isreal. The clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of this judgment 

and its date of entry upon the journal. 

 

 DALE A CRAWFORD 

Judge 

Filed January 26, 2021 

Sent to S.C. Reporter 2/12/21
ANSWER to TSAIA MOTION 

April 29, 2010 

Office of the Ciiief Counsel 

Attention: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket, AGC-610 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Ave., SW. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Docket No. 16-09-14 

ANSWER t o 

MOTION TO STRIKE UNTIMELY "AMENDMENT" TO COMPLAINT 

RDM, LLC V. Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport 

ANSWER 

RDM, LLC (RDM) asks that the Director deny the MOTION TO STRIKE UNTIMELY 

"AMENDMENT" TO COMPLAINT filed by the State of Alaska, Departn^ient of 

Transportation and Public Facilities, Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport 

(TSAIA). 

RDM's complaint against TSAIA is not a formal court proceeding and therefore RDM 

is under no obligation to file a "motion for leave" for an amendment to its complaint 

nor "for its acceptance". The Rules of Practice for Federally Assisted Airport 

Proceedings, 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 16 clearly allows the complainant 

to amend its filing. 

The purpose of the Amendment was to indicate that not only were AGLAD's rights 

brutally violated but TSAIA, but TSAIA's policy failures threaten the larger public 

interests as well. 

Because of the seriousness and magnitude of the TSAIA policy failures, RDM asks the 

FAA to find TSAIA in "non-compliance" and furthermore that the FAA deny continued 

FAA/Public funding to TSAIA until proper and appropriate corrective actions are 

rendered. 

Sincerely, 

Shaun Debenham ;TH 

Member, Debenham Properties, LLC . ^ 

Managing Member of RDM, LLC 

2960 C Street, Suite 202 

Anchorage, AK 99503 

W: (907)562-9330 

F: (907) 562-9331 

E: shaundebenhamPalaska.net 

RDM V. TSAIA - Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

 

 

MICHAEL CEREMELLO,

Plaintiff(s), 

vs. CIV-S-04-1423-DFL EFB

CITY OF DIXON, et al.

Defendant(s). 

______________________________________/

Plaintiff filed a discovery motion on September 12, 2006 and set the matter for hearing

October 11, 2006 @ 10:00 a.m.. Notwithstanding the three days specified by E.D. Cal. L.R. 37-

251 the joint statement shall be filed in no later than five court days before the scheduled

hearing. Unless a copy is delivered personally to chambers on the day after filing, the parties

may not file the joint statement in the court drop box. The filing deadline, accordingly, will be

October 4, 2006.

The dispute may be organized by category, with specific discovery items

attached, if appropriate, as an exhibit. For each disputed category or individual item, include:

(1) the specific disputed discovery category or item; (2) the response; (3) the moving party’s

position; and (4) the opposition. E.D.Cal. L.R. 37-251(c)(3). Do not file separate briefing. Id.

Privilege objections must comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5). Except in

extraordinary circumstances, the party claiming privilege may not submit a post-hearing

privilege log. The failure properly to support a privilege objection with a privilege log may be

deemed to waive it. 

The moving party is responsible for filing the joint statement. The opposing party

nevertheless must timely draft and submit its portion. Failure of either party to use best efforts to

ensure timely filing will be cause for sanctions. 

Dated: 09/28/06 /s/ Edmund F. Brennan

___________________________________

EDMUND F. BRENNAN

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01423-JAM-EFB Document 57 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I,Stephen K. Gartside, Jr., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatthe Quarterly Report of Evolving Systems, Inc. on Form 10-Q for thequarterly period ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in allmaterial respects the financial condition and results of operations of EvolvingSystems, Inc.

 
| /s/ STEPHEN K.  GARTSIDE, JR.     |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Stephen K.  Gartside, Jr.         |
| President and  Chief Executive Officer |
| May 5, 2006                       |

 

This certification isfurnished with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent requiredby such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Suchcertification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into anyfiling under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act,except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it byreference.

 

----