alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
P.1 

OAR Box 1865 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

32) IV-E-20 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 12/3/2008 9:15:28 AM Sheet 32 of 105 
P.2 

RADIAN A- A 3-9 7 

coRixMurtoN n W W Cm % 

IV-E-20 

TELEPHONE CALL REPORT - INDUSTRIAL BOILER SO,, NSPS 

DATE: June 2, 1986 

TO: Mr. Steve Winberg 

Manager, Industrial Sales 

Foster-Wheeler Corporation 

110 South Orange Avenue 

Livingston, N. J. 07039 

FROM: TomWaddell, Radian Corporation 

SUBJECT: Sulfur Dioxide Removal Guarantees for 

Fluidized Bed Combustion (FBC) Units 

Mr. Steve Winberg stated that Foster-Wheeler makes decisions on S0? 

removal guarantees for their FBC units on the basis of the specific fuel 

type and limestone to be used. In general, for coals currently being used 

in FBC units, at least 90 percent S02 removal is guaranteed. However, 

Foster-Wheeler is not to be quoted as guaranteeing 90 percent S02 removal 

for all their FBC units, because guarantees are case specific. 

FBC units can achieve well above 90 percent S02 removal when using 

reactive limestone and increased limestone feed rates. The increased 

limestone addition will raise operating and maintenance costs but will not 

necessarily create reliability problems. FBC units can be designed to 

operate at these higher limestone loadings without adverse impacts on the 

system reliability.
Filed 4/17/23 P. v. Tina R. CA4/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. 

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

TINA R.,

Defendant and Appellant.

 D081326

 (Super. Ct. No. MCR22-030)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, 

Marian F. Gaston, Judge. Affirmed. 

Sally Patone, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant 

and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. 

In January 2022, Tina R. (Appellant) filed a pro. per. request for 

hearing for relief from firearms prohibition pursuant to Welfare and 

Institutions Code1 section 8103, subdivision (f)(1). In February 2022, the 

1 All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions 

Code.
2

Bureau of Firearms filed a report noting that Appellant had a section 5150 

hold in October 2018 and a 14 day proceeding under section 5250 in 

November 2015. 

The trial court summarily denied the request without a hearing. 

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. 

Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 

25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any 

arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to review the 

record for error consistent with the requirements of Wende. We offered 

Appellant the opportunity to file her own brief on appeal, but she has not 

responded.

DISCUSSION

As we have noted appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks 

the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and 

in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel 

has identified a possible issue that was considered in evaluating the potential 

merits of this appeal: Whether the court erred in denying Appellant’s request 

without granting a hearing.

We have reviewed the entire record consistent with Wende and Anders. 

We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. 

Competent counsel has represented Appellant on this appeal.
3

DISPOSITION

The order denying Appellant’s petition for relief under section 8103, 

subdivision (f)(3) is affirmed.

HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:

O’ROURKE, J.

DO, J.
Before the First Division,

July 31, 1941

No. 46226.

#### Protests 492923-G, etc., of Bill & Caldwell, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise in question consists of finished hats wholly or in chief value of wool the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 46131. In accordance therewith the merchandise was held dutiable under paragraph 1115 (a) as claimed.
Exhibit 10.21

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO

THE MEN’S WEARHOUSE, INC. EMPLOYEE STOCK DISCOUNT PLAN

 

THIS AMENDMENT is made by The Men’s Wearhouse, Inc. (the “Sponsor”),

 

WITNESSETH:

 

WHEREAS, the Sponsor has previously adopted the amendment and restatement effective April 1, 2002, of the plan known as “The Men’s Wearhouse, Inc. Employee Stock Discount Plan” (the “Plan”);

 

WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Sponsor has retained the right in Section 9.2 of the Plan to amend the Plan; and

 

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Sponsor desires to amend the Plan to change, effective April 1, 2015, the calculation of the number of shares covered by an option granted under the Plan;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Sponsor agrees that, effective April 1, 2015, Section 4.1 of the Plan is completely amended and restated to provide as follows:

 

4.1          Grant of Option.  Effective as of the Grant Date of each Offering Period, the Committee shall grant an Option to each Participant which shall be exercisable on the Exercise Date only through funds accumulated by the Employee through payroll deductions made during the Offering Period.  The Option shall be for that number of whole and fractional Shares that may be purchased by the amount in the Participant’s payroll deduction account on the Exercise Date at the Option Price, subject to the maximum number of Shares determined by the Committee in accordance with the following sentence.  If so determined by the Committee and announced to Employees prior to an Offering Period, the Committee may establish a maximum number of Shares that may be purchased by a Participant during the Offering Period.  Effective for the Offering Period commencing April 1, 2015, and each subsequent Offering Period until changed by the Committee in accordance with the preceding sentence, the maximum number of Shares that may be purchased by a Participant during an Offering Period is that number of Shares that could be purchased with $650, assuming that the purchase price of the Shares is equal to 85% of the Fair Market Value of the Shares on the Grant Date, but in no case more than 125 Shares.  Effective for the Offering Periods beginning July 1, 2002 and prior to April 1, 2015, such maximum number of Shares that may be purchased by a Participant during the Offering Period shall be 125 Shares.  Effective for Offering Periods commencing prior to July 1, 2002, the maximum number of Shares that may be purchased by a Participant during an Offering Period is that number of Shares that could be purchased with $2,500, assuming that the purchase price of the Shares is equal to 85% of the Fair Market Value of the Shares on the Grant Date.

 











 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Sponsor has executed this Amendment this 23rd day of January, 2015.

 

	
 
    	
THE   MEN’S WEARHOUSE, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/   JON W. KIMMINS
    
	
 
    	
Name:
    	
Jon   W. Kimmins
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
Executive   Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
No. 47942.

#### Protests 6837-K, etc., of F. W. Woolworth Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 47099 the claim at 45 percent under paragraph 397 was sustained.
<PAGE>
                                                                    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

                  In connection with the Annual Report of CenterPoint Energy
Transition Bond Company, LLC (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending
December 31, 2003 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Marc Kilbride, Chief Financial Officer,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

                  1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



/s/  Marc Kilbride
-------------------------------
Marc Kilbride
Vice President and Treasurer
March 29, 2004
(Reap. Dec. 9192)

#### Curt L. Sterner Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. WH 26880, etc.

(Decided July 16, 1958)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

When the appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in schedule *“A,”*attached to and made part of this decision, were called for hearing, there was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff.

An examination of the official record discloses no reason for disturbing the presumptively correct value for the merchandise found by the appraiser.

I, therefore, find and hold the proper dutiable value of the merchandise covered by these appeals to be the value found by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
No. 50540.

#### Protest 47295-K of J. F. Goldkamp & Co. (St. Louis).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on the entry. The protest was sustained to this extent.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

 

In connection with the Form 10-Kof Virginia Commerce Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31,2008, I, William K. Beauchesne, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer ofVirginia Commerce Bancorp, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to thebest of my knowledge and belief, that:

 

(1) such Form 10-K for the yearended December 31, 2008, fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) the information contained in such Form 10-Kfor the year ended December 31, 2008, fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of VirginiaCommerce Bancorp, Inc.

 
| /s/ William K. Beauchesne             |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| William K. Beauchesne                 |   |
| Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
-  Cotton and Tobacco 
-  Dairy 
-  Livestock, Poultry, and Grain 
-  Specialty Crops 
-  Local & Regional Food Marketing 
-  Organic 
-  Retail 
-  Run a Custom Report 
-  Contacts 
-  Search Market News 

**Receipts**
            - Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Estimated Market Receipts

**Slaughter Data**
            - Actual Slaughter Under Federal Inspection (Thu) (pdf)
            - Daily Livestock Slaughter Under Federal Inspection (pdf)
            - Monthly Estimate Calf Slaughter By Type
            - Weekly Estimated Meat Production Under Federal Inspection

**Livestock Meat Publications**
            - Weekly Carlot Meat (Mon) (pdf)

**Wool and Bison**
            - National Wool Report (Fri) (pdf)
            - USDA Monthly Bison (Carcass and Cuts) (pdf)

**Miscellaneous**
            - Food Service Pricing Report (pdf)
            - Graystone Small Animal Auction Sale (Thu) (pdf)
            - Hackettstown, NJ Poultry Auction (Wed) (pdf)
            - National Quarterly Sod Report (pdf)
            - National Dairy Comprehensive Report - Monthly
            - Poultry Slaughtered Under Federal Inspection (Thu)
            - Estimated Slaughter of U.S. Broiler/Fryers and Fowl (Wed)
            - Weekly Miscellaneous Poultry Report (Fri)(pdf)
            - Monthly Miscellaneous Poultry Report (Fri)(pdf)

**Annual Statistics Summary**
            - 2018 (pdf)
            - 2017 (pdf)
            - 2016 (pdf)
            - ( 2015 pdf ) ( 2015 excel )
            - ( 2014 pdf ) ( 2014 zip )
            - ( 2013 pdf ) ( 2013 zip )
            - ( 2012 pdf ) ( 2012 zip )

**Poultry Market Statistics Summary**
            - ( 2013 pdf ) ( 2013 excel )
            - ( 2012 pdf ) ( 2012 excel )
            - ( 2011 pdf ) ( 2011 excel )
            - ( 2010 pdf ) ( 2010 excel )
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8498 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8498

  To authorize funding for necessary expenses for the rehabilitation, 
modernization, and construction of facilities and infrastructure at the 
                 United States Merchant Marine Academy.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 22, 2024

 Mr. Garbarino (for himself, Mr. Suozzi, Mr. Valadao, Mrs. Kiggans of 
 Virginia, Mr. LaLota, Mr. D'Esposito, Ms. Malliotakis, Mr. Van Drew, 
Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. Lawler, and Mr. Molinaro) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize funding for necessary expenses for the rehabilitation, 
modernization, and construction of facilities and infrastructure at the 
                 United States Merchant Marine Academy.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR UNITED STATES MERCHANT 
              MARINE ACADEMY INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES 
              MODERNIZATION.

    There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of 
Transportation for expenses necessary for the phased rehabilitation, 
modernization, and construction of facilities and infrastructure at the 
United States Merchant Marine Academy, consistent with the Full Speed 
Ahead plan developed by the Maritime Security Infrastructure Council as 
set forth in the Congressional Record dated February 28, 2024, 
$1,020,000,000, of which--
            (1) $54,000,000 shall be made available in fiscal year 2025 
        for design and planning purchases, which shall be used for the 
        development of a design and plan for the phased rehabilitation, 
        modernization, and construction of facilities and 
        infrastructure at the United States Merchant Marine Academy; 
        and
            (2) $107,333,333 shall be made available for each of year 
        fiscal years 2026 through 2034 for construction and contingency 
        purchases necessary to execute the design and construction as 
        described in paragraph (1).
                                 <all>
```
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ROBERT S. FRANK FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.

Argued December 18,1967

Decided January 8,1968.

*Mr. Stephen Smith*for appellant *(Messrs. Egan, O’Donnell, Hanley & Clifford,*attorneys).

*Mr. James M. Kenihan,*Assistant Prosecutor, for respondent *(Mr. Frank C. Seerbo,*Morris County Prosecutor, attorney) .

The opinion of the court was delivered

Pee Cubiam.

This ease involves the legal propriety of the Governor’s warrant for the extradition of Robert S. Prank to the State of Texas. The County Court sustained his action and the Appellate Division affirmed.

We have examined the record and agree that no basis for intervention by the judicial branch of the government has been shown.

Affirmed.

*For*affirmance—Chief Justice Weinteaub and Justices Jacobs, Peancis, Peoctoe, Goldmann, Schettino and Haneman—7.

*For*reversal—None.
D

|  | **BOOKS** |
|--|-----------|
|  |
|  |

----

| **Links to other titles**
**Other Books**              - author              index- title              index

**CADRE Papers**              - author              index- title              index

**Fairchild Papers**              - author              index- title              index

**SAASS Theses**              - author index              - title index

**Maxwell Papers** *              - index

**Wright Flyer Papers** *             - index

* Available as downloads in PDF format only.

Distribution Policy**About this                title**
Airpower Journal Index,                1987-1996Michael J. Petersen and                Pamela Lang, eds.
1998, 208 pages

order no. B-49 | download

 
This reference lists all articles and book reviews                appearing in the *Airpower Journal* from 1987 to 1996 in author, title, and                subject indexes.                                 
Next Title | Previous title | AU Press home
  |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8516 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8516

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 840 Front Street in Casselton, North Dakota, as the ``Commander 
                  Delbert Austin Olson Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 2024

Mr. Armstrong introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 840 Front Street in Casselton, North Dakota, as the ``Commander 
                  Delbert Austin Olson Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. COMMANDER DELBERT AUSTIN OLSON POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 840 Front Street in Casselton, North Dakota, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Commander Delbert Austin Olson Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Commander 
Delbert Austin Olson Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
Before the Second Division,

June 16, 1959

No. 63177.

#### The Durst Mfg. Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 58/12373, 58/12475, and 58/13143 (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of constituent and integral parts of toilet-box assemblies the same in all material respects as those the subject of *The Durst Mfg. Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(36 Cust. Ct. 220, C.D. 1778), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-60040

Summary Calendar

 

ARTHUR IVY, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI CORRECTION

FACILITY, Medical Clinic,

Defendant,

ROBERT CULPEPPER; 

JOHN F. DONNELLY,JR.; STEVE PUCKETT,

Defendants-Appellees

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:97-CV-322-BN

- - - - - - - - - -

January 5, 1999

Before DAVIS, DUHE’, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Arthur Ivy, Jr., Mississippi prisoner no. 76754, appeals the 

grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants Dr. Robert

Culpepper; John F. Donnelly Jr., superintendent of the Central

Mississippi Correctional Facility, medical clinic (CMCF); and

Steve Puckett, commissioner of the Mississippi Department of 
No. 98-60040

-2-

Corrections (MDOC). CMCF had been dismissed from the lawsuit in

a previous ruling which is not challenged on appeal.

Ivy’s complaint, liberally construed, alleges only that

efforts that have been made to provide him with a properlyfitting prosthesis have been unsuccessful. “Unsuccessful medical

treatment does not give rise to a § 1983 cause of action.” 

Varnado v. Lynaugh, 920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991).

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
10.3


March
17, 2015


 


Dear Dr.
Mivev


 


This
letter is a follow up to our previous discussion about the Scientific Advisory Board for Regen BioPharma, Inc. The
function of the Scientific Advisory Board is to review research directions that Regen BioPharma, Inc.  may undertake, determining
those projects which may lead to future developments/advancements in the field of stem cell therapy. Other areas may be pursued
as well, with advice from this advisory board.


 


You
will receive 100,000 shares of Regen Biopharma, Series A Preferred Stock.Regen’s common stock currently trades on the OTC
Bulletin Board. The Company anticipates obtaining a stock symbol for the Series A preferred in the near future. The 100,000 shares
of Biopharma, Series A Preferred shares are consideration for participating in telephonic calls/conference calls and serving on
Regen BioPharma, Inc.’s Scientific Advisory Board. Under this SAB agreement ,the frequency and timing of such calls will
be approximately one call every month


 


Additionally,
this agreement may be renewed by mutual consent each year on its anniversary date for a maximum of 2 additional years. The compensation
on renewal will be another payment of 100,000 Series A preferred stock in Regen on each anniversary that this contract is renewed
by the Company.


 


It
is anticipated that members of the Scientific Advisory Board will potentially serve as primary research consultants to the Company
as such projects are undertaken. Compensation for such projects will be negotiated separately on a case-by-case basis between
the Company and the consultant.


 


Thank You
for your consideration.


 


David R.
Koos


Chairman
and CEO


  


P.S.:
Please sign this letter in your acceptance and fax back to me at 619-330-2328. Any usage of your name in any press releases will
be submitted to you for review and comment before being released to the public.


 


	 	 
	/s/ Dr. Boris Minev	 
	Dr. Boris Minev	 
	Date: 3/17/2015