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

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The ACRS Subcommittee on Materials, Metallurgy, and Reactor Fuels will hold a meeting on April 3, 2007, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 

The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. 

The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: 

## Tuesday, April 3, 2007—8:30 a.m. Until the Conclusion of Business. 

The Subcommittee will review the NRC staff's proposed revisions to Standard Review Plan Section 4.2, “Fuel Designs.” The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, their contractors, representatives of the nuclear industry, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. 

Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Ralph Caruso (telephone 301/415-8065) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. 

Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. 

Dated: March 14, 2007. 

Cayetano Santos, 

Acting Branch Chief, ACRS.

 [FR Doc. E7-5035 Filed 3-19-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
Before the First Division,

September 28, 1950

No. 54695.

#### Naumes Forwarding Service *v.*United States,

protests 135118-K/1405 and 141140-K/1645 (Chicago).

*280Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of leather miniature boxing gloves and baseball gloves or other leather articles similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc.*(37 C. C. P. A. 32, C. A. D. 415), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
JAMES DANIEL TURNER 

'. 

Abel Acosta, Clerk / 

l II !/
#### LOUIS KAPLAN, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, v. WILLIAM GREEN, *ET ALS.,*DEFENDANTS, AND IRVING A. FELDMAN, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

*Messrs. Magner, Abraham, Orlando & Kahn*and *Mr. John Pisanslcy*for the petitioner.

*Messrs. Davidson <& Buttermore*for the respondent.

January 29, 1968.

Granted.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Andrew Harris, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 378]

—Appeal by the de*366fendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Beldock, J.), rendered January 12, 1993, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Jones, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We find unpersuasive the defendant’s contention that the hearing court erred in determining that the police lawfully pursued and arrested him. The evidence adduced at the hearing and credited by the court established that, as two detectives approached a building while on an unrelated criminal investigation, one of the detectives observed the defendant run inside the building. The detective further observed that the defendant was proceeding up the stairs inside the building while holding a handgun. Under these circumstances, the detective clearly had a sufficient factual predicate for entering the building, pursuing the defendant, and placing him under arrest *(see, People v McRay,*51 NY2d 594; *People v Dawkins,*201 AD2d 336; *People v Sargeant,*174 AD2d 767). Moreover, it is well settled that the hearing court’s factual findings and credibility determinations are entitled to great deference on appeal *(see, People v Prochilo,*41 NY2d 759; *People v Overton,*188 AD2d 491), and we discern no basis in the record for disturbing the court’s conclusion in this case.

The defendant’s current challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Gray,*86 NY2d 10; *People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Altman, Hart and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
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

JOEL ANTHONY HOLLEY,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2708 LKK PAN P

vs.

TOM L. CAREY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme

Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent

prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In

certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991);

Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court

does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of

counsel will therefore be denied.

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02708-LKK -EFB Document 46 Filed 07/28/06 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 plaintiff’s May 31, 2006 motion for

the appointment of counsel is denied.

DATED: July 27, 2006.

/mp

holl2708.31

Case 2:04-cv-02708-LKK -EFB Document 46 Filed 07/28/06 Page 2 of 2
Electronically Filed 

Supreme Court 

SCWC-13-0002226 

07-OCT-2014 

08:58 AM 

SCWC-13-0002226
 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
 

STATE OF HAWAI'I,


Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,
 

vs.
 

MARTIN YOUNG,


Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.
 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
 

(CAAP-13-0002226; CR. NO. 12-1-1580)
 

ORDER DISMISSING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
 

It appearing that the judgment on appeal in the abovereferenced matter not having been filed by the Intermediate Court 

of Appeals at the time the application for certiorari was filed, 

see Hawai'i Revised Statutes § 602-59(a) (Supp. 2013); see also 

Hawai'i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 36(b)(1) (2012), 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s application for
 

writ of certiorari, filed September 30, 2014, is dismissed
 

without prejudice to re-filing the application pursuant to HRAP
 

Rule 40.1(a) (2014) (“The application shall be filed within
 

thirty days after the filing of the intermediate court of 

appeals’ judgment on appeal or dismissal order, unless the time
 

for filing the application is extended in accordance with this
 

rule.”).
 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, October 7, 2014. 

Glenn D. Choy

for petitioner
 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
 

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
 

/s/ Richard W. Pollack
 

/s/ Michael D. Wilson
 

2
(Reap. Dec. 10455)

#### Andrew Fisher Cycle Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 7658, etc.

(Decided February 27, 1963)

*Brooks é Brooks*for tbe plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for tbe defendant.

OliveR, Chief Judge:

Counsel for the parties have submitted the appeals for reappraisement, enumerated in the attached schedule, for decision upon stipulation, on the basis of which I find that export value, as defined in section 402(b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis for the determination of the values of the bicycle tires, tubes, rimtapes, and/or rimbands, imported from Holland, here involved, and that such values were the invoiced unit prices, as entered.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Page 1 of 6
 

 

Page 2 of 6
Page 3 of 6
Page 4 of 6
 

 

 

 

 

Page 5 of 6
 

Page 6 of 6
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8157 

To prohibit the Secretary of the Army from carrying out certain spillage 

operations on the Lower Snake River dams, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 29, 2024 

Mr. NEWHOUSE (for himself, Mrs. RODGERS of Washington, Mr. FULCHER, 

and Mr. BENTZ) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Secretary of the Army from carrying out 

certain spillage operations on the Lower Snake River 

dams, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON SPILLAGE OPERATIONS ON 

4 LOWER SNAKE RIVER DAMS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may not carry out 

6 any spillage operations on any of the Lower Snake River 

7 dams unless such operations are approved by the Sec8 retary and the Administrator of the Bonneville Power Ad9 ministration. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8157 IH

1 (b) CONSIDERATIONS.—In determining whether to 

2 approve spillage operations under subsection (a), the Sec3 retary and the Administrator shall consider all Columbia 

4 River System operations. 

5 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

6 (1) LOWER SNAKE RIVER DAMS.—The term 

7 ‘‘Lower Snake River dams’’ means the following 

8 dams in the State of Washington, authorized by sec9 tion 2 of the Act of March 2, 1945 (chapter 19, 59 

10 Stat. 21): 

11 (A) Ice Harbor Dam. 

12 (B) Lower Monumental Dam. 

13 (C) Little Goose Dam. 

14 (D) Lower Granite Dam. 

15 (2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

16 the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief 

17 of Engineers. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 14, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11880-11881]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4439]

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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than April 6, 2007.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Glenda Wilson, Community 
Affairs Officer) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:
    1. Tri-County Holdings, Inc., Dongola, Illinois; to become a bank 
holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of First 
State Bank of Dongola, Dongola, Illinois.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Donna J. Ward, Assistant 
Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. Citizens National Corporation, Wisner, Nebraska; to acquire 100

[[Page 11881]]

percent of the voting shares of Spalding City Corporation, Omaha, 
Nebraska, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Spalding City 
Bank, Spalding, Nebraska.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 7, 2007.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E7-4439 Filed 3-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
```
No. 60889.

#### Galatex Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 253040-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the issue herein is similar in all material respects to that involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that case No. 4327 in entry WHB 03757, reported by the inspector as manifested but not found, was not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty is not assessable upon the case of merchandise reported by the inspector as manifested but not found. The protest was sustained to this extent.
29-JAN-2014
ADDENDUM TO COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AGREEMENT


 


THIS
JANUARY 29, 2014 ADDENDUM IS TO THE COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AGREEMENT that was entered into the 24th day of January,
2014, by and between Shredderhotline.com Company, a Illinois corporation (hereafter referred to as “SHLDC”),
with its principal office at 1215 North Bloomington Street, Streator Illinois 61364 and Garb Corporation, a Utah corporation
(hereafter referred to as “GARB”), with its principal office at 12350 South Belcher Road Bldg 14B, Largo, FL
33773, collectively hereafter referred to as the “Parties” and individually as a “Party”.


 


29-JAN-2014
ADDENDUM:


 


Article
4 - Term of the January 24, 2014 Collaborative Effort Agreement is amended to add the following at the end of the original article:


 


“As
an additional condition for the continuance of the CE, Tammy Taylor is to remain the primary GARB contact to SHLDC.”


 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Addendum as of the dates appearing below.


 


“SHLDC”


ShredderhotIine.com
Company
----

Exhibit 32.2 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

The undersigned, Terence Yap, the Chief Financial Officer ofCHINA SECURITY & SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY, INC. (the "Company"), DOES HEREBYCERTIFY that: 

1. 

The Company’sQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 (the"Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

2. 

Informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operation of the Company. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed thisstatement this 5th day of December 2008. 

/s/ Terence Yap                                                                            Terence Yap Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to China Security & Surveillance Technology, Inc.and will be retained by China Security & Surveillance Technology, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It isnot being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing ofthe Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of anygeneral incorporation language in such filing 

 

----
Before the Second Division,

July 21, 1941

No. 46175.

#### Protests 27124-K, etc., of Manhattan Grocery Co., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the containers in question are in chief value of tin plate, not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, or colored with gold lacquer, the claim at 22)4 percent under paragraph 397 was sustained.
No. 65532.

#### Morris Shoenthal, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 328085-K (New York).

Ford, Judge:

When this case was called for trial, counsel for plaintiff submitted this matter on the official papers.

An examination of the official papers fails to disclose any evidence which would overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the classification of the collector. *Atlantic Aluminum & Metal Distributors, Inc.*v. *United States,*47 C.C.P.A. (Customs) 88, C.A.D. 735.

Accordingly, the protest is overruled!

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

Relator

. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 9

- 00 183

- C R

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

O R D E R

Pending before the Court is the State’s motion for the court reporter to file in this

mandamus proceeding the sealed and in camera record of an ex parte hearing conducted by the

trial court on July 8, 2019 in cause number 20190D01508 , styled The State of T exas v. Kevin

Quezada . The motion is GRANTED. The reporter’s record is due to be filed on or before August

22, 2019 . The sealed reporter’s record will be available exclusively for the use of the Court in

ruling on the State’s petition for writ of m andamus. The Clerk of the Court is directed to ensure

that the record is treated as an in camera record and that it not be made available to the attorneys

representing the State.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 1 st day of August

, 20 1 9

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
#### James Battle v. S. E. Stone, as Sheriff of Volusia County.

179 So. 148.

Opinion Filed February 9, 1938.

*137
      *M. S. McGregor,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Cary D.*Landis, Attorney General, and *Tyrus A. Nor-wood,*Assistant Attorney General, for Defendant in Error.

Chapman, J.

On October 23, 1936, plaintiff in error filed in the Circuit Court of Volusia County, Florida, his petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging, among other things, that he was unlawfully restrained of his liberty by S. E. Stone, as Sheriff of Volusia County, Florida. A writ of habeas corpus issued and was directed to S. E. Stone, as Sheriff of Volusia County, commanding that he produce the body of petitioner, with the cause of his said detention. Honorable S. E. Stone, Sheriff of Volusia County, Florida, filed his return to the writ of habeas corpus, and for cause of detention showed that he held the said James Battle, plaintiff in error, by virtue of a commitment to serve a sentence issuing out of the Justice of the Peace Court of the Ninth District of Volusia County, Florida, on October 20, 1936, by George L. Kelley, Justice of the Peace. The commitment directed the said James Battle to pay a fine of $5.00 and costs of prosecution amounting to $29.76, and in default thereof, to serve a term of sixty days in the county jail at hard labor, subject to the Board of County Commissioners.

The cause was heard on the 23rd day of October, 1936, by Honorable H. B. Frederick, Circuit Judge of Volusia County, Florida, and after the hearing an order was made and entered remanding plaintiff in error to the custody of *138S. E. Stone, as Sheriff of Volusia County, Florida, to serve the sentence imposed and described in the commitment.

A writ of error was sued out, supersedeas perfected, and the cause is here for review and a reversal is sought of the order remanding plaintiff in error to the custody of the Sheriff of Volusia County.

The transcript of the record was filed in this Court on November 20, 1936, and a brief m support of petitioner’s contention has not been filed as required by the rule of this Court. On December 20, 1937, Honorable Cary D. Landis, Attorney General, by Tyrus A. Norwood, Assistant Attorney General, filed a motion to affirm the judgment of the lower court in this cause on the ground that the precise question raised in said appeal was decided adversely to the petitioner by this Court on November 4, 1937, in the case of Willie Scott v. S. E. Stone, as Sheriff of Volusia County, Florida. We have examined the entire transcript of the record, as well as the citation of authority, *supra,*and it appearing that the contention of the Attorney General’s office is well founded and should be granted on the authority, *supra,*the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.