alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Appliances & Commercial Equipment Standards: Residential Furnaces and Boilers Final Rule

U.& DepafteW of Ere 

# Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Page 1 of 2

1EFr rl 

### ^^ €'nM am Arn;is
Search Help is More Search Options EEr~ E Infcerrnation Center Appii•3nxes Home About Standards Laws 6, Regulations EPACT 2005 Test Procedures Peer Review Informat ion Resources Notices L- Rules Schedule Setting Public workshops & Hearings Stake Petitions Useful Links Commercial Equipment Resident ial Products Battery Chargers .& External Pu4teer Supplies Ceiling Fans &. Ceiling Fan Light Kits Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pump" Clothes Dryers Clothes 'c a

l 31-ieri Cooking Products I) ehum dil Nr : Dish-A'asFier5 Furnaces E. Boilers Fluorescent Lamp rda11asts Fluorescent & Inrarr,1e cent Limps. PI:ijmainri Products PooI I-leai:e'rc ( efrigdrat rs Li; Free2ers P;oorn Air !=onditirlr ers 

# Residential Furnaces and Boilers Final Rule The Department has published its new energy efficiency standards for residential furnaces and boilers and it is available on this site as published in the Federal Register. Some of the following documents are available as Adobe Acrobat PDFs . Download Adobe Reader.
• Final Rule Technical SLi pnI l Document • Final Rule Analyticaf Tools • Finding of No Significant Impact: Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products , November 8, 2007 (.P F_49 K-13) 

### • Final Rule : Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces and Boilers (PDF _1 08 M B



## httD://www.eere.enerL-v.2ov/buildiniis/annliance standards/residential/furnace boiler fr.html 2/1/2008

## Appliances & Commercial Equipment Standards: Residential Furnaces and Boilers Final Rule Page 2 of 2

:_nr.j [ L EJc:. i ighr ti..I:, Air Cul-,JiLiCIrers

[•'rini ab le Version
Webmaste[ I Security & Privacy I Bkll.1 ling c noI_]^iie f?rogrem Horne I EERE Fiui' U.S. Department of Energy 

### Content Last Updated : 11/19/2007

httr^ •//cvcvcv aara anarnv trnvMni1,1incre / ar^r^lionna elan`lorrle /racirlanti ,1 Ifnrnar a hnilar -Fr html ')/ l /')nnQ
No. 53630.

protests 113103-K, etc. (New York).

#### Comex Wine & Spirits, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 38664

STATE OF IDAHO

,

Plaintiff-Respondent

,

v.

WAYDE EUGENE EPHRAIM

,

Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 414

Filed: March 28, 2012

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, Canyon County. Hon. Bradly S. Ford , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and concurrent unified sentences of life, with minimum periods of confinement of twenty

- five years, for two counts of lewd conduct with

a minor under sixteen

, affirmed

.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon . Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for responde nt.

________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge; and GUTIERREZ, Judge

PER CURIAM

Wayde Eugene Ephraim pled guilty to two counts of lewd conduct with a minor under

sixteen. Idaho C ode § 18

- 1508 . The district court sentenced Ephraim to concurrent unified

terms of life, with a minimum period of confinement of twenty

- five years. Ephraim appeals

, requesting this Court to reduce the determinate portion of his sentence

. Sentencing is a matter for the tr ial court's discretion. Both our standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

-

1 5 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.2 1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Ephraim ’s judgment of conviction and sentence s are affirmed.
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1683-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Oregon (FEMA-1683-DR), dated February 22, 2007, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

March 16, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Oregon is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of February 22, 2007:

Wasco County for Public Assistance. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds:  97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison, 

Under Secretary for Federal Emergency Management and Director of FEMA.

 [FR Doc. E7-5527 Filed 3-26-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
#### In the Matter of the New York, West Shore and Buffalo Railway Company, to Acquire Title to Certain Real Estate of the Syracuse, Chenango and New York Railroad Company, and others.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and ~ disbursements.
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The First Marblehead Corporation (the "Company") for the
quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kenneth Klipper, Managing Director, Chief Financial Officer,
Treasurer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby 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:



Dated: November 6, 2009

/s/ KENNETH KLIPPER Kenneth Klipper Managing Director, Chief Financial Officer,
Treasurer and Chief Accounting Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The First Marblehead Corporation and will be retained by The First
Marblehead Corporation and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 10.22


                            LINE OF CREDIT AGREEMENT

$100,000

Yorba Linda, California

September 7, 2000

         The undersigned, TD and Associates, Inc. ("TD") and Geo Petroleum, Inc.
(Geo"), agree that TD will make available to Geo a line of credit with the
maximum amount available not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000)
with a monthly variable simple interest rate of New York prime (as defined by
the Wall Street Journal) plus two percent (prime plus 2%). The rate of interest
for each month shall be determined by reference to the Western Edition of the
Wall Street Journal for the first closest following day if the first day of any
month is a holiday. Geo promises to make monthly interest-only payments to TD on
the 7th day of each month on the then outstanding balance in full together with
any then outstanding interest accrued on or before Septemer 7, 2001. Failure to
make an installment of interest when due, shall permit TD to declare all
principal and accrued but unpaid interest immediately due and payable by giving
written notice to Geo of TD's elections to do so within five days of the date of
the failure. Failure to declare a default shall not prejudice the right of TD to
declare defaults for any subsequent failure to pay interest.

         Upon default in payment at maturity, interest shall continue to accrue
at the rate stated above. In case payment shall not be made at maturity, the
undersigned further promises to pay all costs of collection and reasonable
attorney's fees. Drawings under this line may be made in minimum increments of
Five Thousand Dollars, provided that Geo has given TD at least five days written
notice of its desire to draw under this line and the amount that it desires to
draw. No drawing may be made under this line after December 31, 2000. Amounts
borrowed and repaid may not be reborrowed. Each drawing shall be evidenced by a
Promissory Note in the form of that attached as Exhibit A.

Geo Petroleum, Inc.                      TD and Associates, Inc.

By:                                      By:

/s/   Lori Timpe-Long                   /s/   DennisTimpe
---------------------                   ---------------------

Its:                                    Its:

   CFO                                     President
---------------------                   ---------------------
No. 53073.

#### Chong Kee Jan & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 922779-G, etc. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO REGISTRATION RIGHTS AGREEMENT

     This  Amendment No. 1 to Registration Rights Agreement (the "Amendment") is
made  and  entered  into  as  of the ____ day of November, 2000, by and Telscape
International,  a Texas corporation (the "Company"), and the Purchasers (as such
term  is defined in that certain Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of June
2, 2000, by and between the Company and the Purchasers (the "Registration Rights
Agreement").

     WHEREAS,  the  Company  and  the  Purchasers  entered into the Registration
Rights  Agreement;  and

     WHEREAS,  the  Company  and  the  Purchasers wish to amend the terms of the
Registration  Rights  Agreement  as  described  herein;

     NOW,  THEREFORE,  in  consideration  of  the  mutual promises, benefits and
covenants  herein  contained,  the  Company  and  the Purchasers hereby agree as
follows:

     1.     Unless  otherwise  defined,  all capitalized terms used herein shall
have  the  meaning  ascribed  to them in the Registration Rights Agreement.  All
references  to  Section  herein  shall be to Sections of the Registration Rights
Agreement.

     2.     The  first  sentence  of Section 2.1(a) shall be amended read in its
entirety  as  follows:

     (a)     Subject to the provisions set forth in Article 7, the Company shall
file,  on or before the date that is 90 days following the first issuance of the
Company's  Class  G Senior Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share, with the
Commission  a registration statement under the Securities Act on Form S-3 or any
appropriate  form  (or  any  successor  form)  pursuant  to  Rule  415 under the
Securities  Act.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 1as
of  the  date  first  above  written.


                              TELSCAPE  INTERNATIONAL,  INC.


                              By: _________________________________
                              Name: _______________________________
                              Title: ______________________________


                              PURCHASERS:


<PAGE>
                              TSG  CAPITAL  FUND  III,  L.P.

                              By:  TSG  ASSOCIATES  III,  L.L.C.


                              By: _________________________________
                                  Darryl  B.  Thompson
                                  Executive  Vice  President


                              OPPORTUNITY CAPITAL PARTNERS  II, L.P.


                              By: _________________________________
                              Name: _______________________________
                              Title: ______________________________


                              OPPORTUNITY CAPITAL  PARTNERS III, L.P.


                              By: _________________________________
                              Name: _______________________________
                              Title: ______________________________


<PAGE>
#### Samuel H. Hurd, *as Receiver, etc., Respondent, v.*The Farmers’ Loan and Trust Company, *Appellant.*

— Order affirmed, without costs. Opinion by Daniels, J.
No. 48,421

#### William LeRoy Breier, *Appellant,*v. R. R. Raines, *Appellee.*

(559 P. 2d 813)

Opinion filed January 22, 1977.

*E. Roger Horsky,*of Leavenworth, was on the brief for the appellant.

*Curt T. Schneider,*attorney general, *Roger M. Theis,*assistant attorney general, and *Kenneth Doyle,*institution attorney, Kansas State Penitentiary, were on the brief for the appellee.

*Ter Civriam:*

This is an appeal from the order of the trial court denying William LeRoy Breier (petitioner-appellant) a hearing upon his writ of habeas corpus pursuant to K. S. A. 60-1501 and dismissing the appellants action.

When this action was filed appellant was confined in the Kansas State Penitentiary serving a sentence for robbery. He alleges he was sexually assaulted by another inmate on June 16, 1973; he was not permitted to see a doctor for ten days after the assault, and he was denied an opportunity to file criminal charges in the district court of Leavenworth County against his assailant.

The record shows appellant received medical attention. (See *Coppinger v. Townsend,*398 F. 2d 392 [10th Cir. 1968]; and *Paniagua v. Moseley,*451 F. 2d 228 [10th Cir. 1971].) Upon appellant’s complaint the attacker was “disciplined” by the prison authorities complying with the administrative rules of procedure. Nowhere is there a showing that the mistreatment claimed by appellant was continuing or probably would continue. Likewise there is no showing of abuse or caprice upon the part of prison officials. In fact, a damage suit in federal district court against prison officials founded on the facts in this case was dismissed because appellant failed to show obvious neglect or intentional mistreatment. *(Breier v. Atkins,*L-2737 [D. Kan. 1975].)

The trial court properly ruled that “the petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be 'granted in a habeas corpus proceeding.”

Continuing, or probable continuing, mistreatment must be shown to support an action in habeas corpus. *(Levier v. State,*209 Kan. *440442, 497 P. 2d 265.) Furthermore, responsible prison administration is not subject to judicial review in the absence of actions constituting clear abuse or caprice upon the part of prison officials. *(Levier v. State,*supra.)

The judgment of the lower court is affirmed.
(Reap. Dec. 9188)

#### I. J. Simon Shoe Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 892487.

(Decided July 11, 1958)

*Fred Bennett*for the plaintiff.

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

MollisoN, Judge:

This case has been submitted for decision upon stipulation of counsel reading, so far as pertinent, as‘follows:

> THAT certain of the merchandise covered by this importation is described in the invoice as 288 pairs of Hip Boots, item No. 7-774; that the specification sheet did not list any Hip Boots, item No. 7-774, but did list Hip Boots, item No. 7-678; that Hip Boots item No. 7-774 have kneeharness attached, while Hip Boots item No. 7-678, are without kneeharness attached;

> THAT this shipment did not include any Hip Boots with kneeharness attached (item No. 7-774), but did include 288 pairs of Hip Boots without kneeharness attached (item No. 7-678) ;

> THAT said Hip Boots without kneeharness are subject to appraisement on the basis of the American Selling Price of a like or similar domestic article and that the American Selling Price of a like or similar domestic article is $9.55 per pair, less 2%, packed.

> THAT this appeal for reappraisement is abandoned as to all items of mer- ■ chandise covered by this appeal with the exception of the 288 pairs of Hip Boots, hereinabove referred to;

On tbe agreed facts I find American selling price, as defined in section 402 (g) of tbe Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, to be tbe proper basis for tbe determination of tbe value of tbe merchandise involved, and tbat such value, as to tbe merchandise described on tbe invoice as 288 pairs of hip boots, item No. 7-774, is $9.55 per pair, less 2 per centum, packed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
AFS-12-176-E 

February 16, 2012 

 Exemption No. 9292A 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2001-11043 

Mr. Peter S. Rothwell 

Corporate Secretary and General Counsel 

Dassault Falcon Jet Corp. 

Teterboro Airport, 200 Riser Road 

Little Ferry, NJ 07643 

Dear Mr. Rothwell: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 9292, 

as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect, and lists the 

conditions and limitations. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated January 18, 2012, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation (Dassault) for an extension of Exemption 

No. 9292, as amended. This exemption from §§ 47.65 and 47.69(b) of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) permits Dassault to obtain a Dealer’s Aircraft Registration 

Certificate without meeting the United States citizenship requirements and to conduct limited 

flights outside the United States under this certificate. 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption 

(Exemption No. 5315.) 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Dassault. 
 2

Our Decision 

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 5315, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption. Therefore, under the authority 

provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and §§ 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to 

me, I grant your petition. 

Conditions and Limitations 

1. The aircraft must be owned by Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation. 

2. The aircraft must have a temporary registration number or an assigned registration 

number affixed as provided by 14 CFR part 45. 

3. When the aircraft does not have a standard airworthiness certificate, permission of the 

host country (countries) must be obtained before flights to or through that country. 

4. Dassault shall maintain records of each international flight for a period of one year 

after the aircraft returns to the United States, and such records to consist of: 

a) Registration number and manufacturer’s serial number; 

b) Dates of departure and return to the United States; and 

c) General overseas itinerary. 

The Effect of Our Decision 

A copy of this exemption must be carried in each aircraft operated outside the United States. 

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 9292, as amended, to May 31, 

2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 5315, as amended, remain the same. This 

letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 5315. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John S. Duncan 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, LTD.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Development Partners, Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 1, 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, John R. Sprouls 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 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: August 10, 2007



By:

/s/ JOHN R. SPROULSJohn R. SproulsPrincipal Executive Officer
Before the Second Division,

June 4, 1953

No. 57384.

petition 6822-R (Laredo).

#### H. L. Spindle, Agent (Attorney in fact for the R. T. Vanderbilt Co.) *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It appeared that there was no advance in the entered value of the lubricating grease, the undervaluation occurring only with reference to the metal containers therefor. The petitioner testified that he had made all of the entries involved; that he had inquired as to the value of the lubricating grease and of the drums, and it was his practice to keep informed of the market values through correspondence and in person with the manager of the exporting concern; and that on receipt of such information, he would pass such data on to the appraiser. Upon the record presented, it was held that there was no intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive-the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.