alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 11, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18248-18249]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6853]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Revocations

    The Federal Maritime Commission hereby gives notice that the 
following Ocean Transportation Intermediary licenses have been revoked 
pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. chapter 
409) and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing 
of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR Part 515, effective on 
the corresponding date shown below:

    License Number: 016704F.
    Name: Candice K. Blankenship.
    Address: 1025 Wynngate Drive, Chesapeake, VA 23320.
    Date Revoked: March 15, 2007.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 004664F.
    Name: Cornerstone Logistics Incorporated.
    Address: 1017 Grandview Drive, So. San Francisco, CA 94080.
    Date Revoked: March 12, 2007.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 018482N.
    Name: Dolphin Shipping, Inc.
    Address: 600 E. Ocean Blvd., Ste. 802, Long Beach, CA 90802.
    Date Revoked: March 17, 2007.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 019816F.
    Name: Eastern Mercantile, Inc.
    Address: 5232 Settlers Park Drive, Virginia Beach, VA 23464.
    Date Revoked: March 17, 2007.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 019662NF.
    Name: Hemisphere Cargo Corp. dba H Cargo Lines
    Address: 10850 Northwest 21st Street, Ste. 100, Miami, FL 33172.
    Date Revoked: March 17, 2007.
    Reason: Failed to maintain valid bonds.

    License Number: 018339NF.
    Name: International Freight Logistics LLC.
    Address: 28803 Flower Park Drive, Inglewood, CA 90301.
    Date Revoked: April 2, 2007.
    Reason: Surrendered license voluntarily.

    License Number: 020480NF.
    Name: New Horizon Shipping, Inc.
    Address: 30251 Golden Lantern, Ste. E-<greek-i>207, Laguna Niguel, 
CA 92677.
    Date Revoked: March 13, 2007.
    Reason: Surrendered license voluntarily.

    License Number: 018818N.
    Name: Ramses Logistics USA, Inc.
    Address: 18726 S. Western Ave., Ste. 317, Gardena, CA 90248.
    Date Revoked: March 17, 2007.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 015262N.
    Name: Triton Forwarding, Inc.
    Address: 3080 Bristol Street, Ste. 610, Costa Mesa, CA 92626.
    Date Revoked: March 14, 2007.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.


[[Page 18249]]


    License Number: 019351NF.
    Name: YJC Global, Inc.
    Address: 460 E. Carson Plaza Drive, <greek-i>219, Carson, CA 90746.
    Date Revoked: March 17, 2007.
    Reason: Surrendered license voluntarily.

Sandra L. Kusumoto,
Director, Bureau of Certification and Licensing.
 [FR Doc. E7-6853 Filed 4-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
#### O. Uyeno *v.*United States

No. 7525.

Entry No. 5896.

Invoice dated Yokohama, Japan, August 6, 1935.

Certified August 6, 1935.

Entered at New York, N. Y., September 4, 1935. '

(Decided February 2, 1948)

*Skarretls & Hillis (Howard C. Carter*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Tilson, Judge:

In submitting this appeal for decision counsel for the respective parties have agreed that the unit invoice values of this merchandise, plus the cost- *A*packing represent the price, at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States; that the foreign value of such or similar merchandise was not higher, and the record in *United States*v. *Nippon Dry Goods Co.,*Reap. Dec. 5006, has been admitted in evidence herein.

Upon the agreed facts and following the cited authority, I find and hold the proper dutiable export values of the merchandise covered by this appeal to be the unit invoice values, plus packing. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
# DelayandMileage
No. 56588.

protests 528100-G, etc. (New York).

#### W. A. Taylor & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of grenadine the same in all material respects as that the -subject of *La Manna, Azema & Farnan, Inc.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 44, C. A. D. 461), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
PUBLIC LAW 111–336—DEC. 22, 2010 124 STAT. 3587 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 2906: 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 111–246 (Comm. on Indian Affairs). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010): 

Sept. 22, considered and passed Senate. 

Dec. 14, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–336 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to modify a provision relating to leases 

involving certain Indian tribes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. LEASES INVOLVING CERTAIN INDIAN TRIBES. 

The first section of the Act of August 9, 1955 (25 U.S.C. 415), 

is amended— 

(1) in subsection (a), in the second sentence, by inserting 

‘‘and land held in trust for the Kalispel Tribe of Indians, the 

Puyallup Tribe of Indians,’’ after ‘‘the Kalispel Indian Reservation’’; and 

(2) in subsection (b), by inserting ‘‘, the Puyallup Tribe 

of Indians, the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, or the 

Kalispel Tribe of Indians’’ after ‘‘Tulalip Tribes’’. 

Approved December 22, 2010. 

Dec. 22, 2010 

[S. 2906] 


dkrause on GSDDPC29PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
1

Rail Safety Investment Highlights

UPCOMING SELECTION ANNOUNCEMENTS: 

May/June 2023: FY22 RCE Selections

August/Sept 2023: FY22 CRISI Selections

Law Enforcement/ 

Trespassing

$2.16M

Safety Research, Development, 

and Innovation (FY21 CRISI)

$17.8M

Physical Infrastructure Safety 

Improvements (FY21 CRISI)

$372.9M

CRISI

$1.4B

Available Funding

For more information about FRA discretionary grant programs: www.fra.dot.gov/GrantsTool

HIGHLIGHTS Michigan: $21.3M

Great Lakes Corridor 

Improvement Grant

Improves safety and 

upgrades track along a 

45 mile freight route

Ohio: $6.1M

River Road Highway/ Rail 

Grade Crossing Safety 

Improvements

Improves multi-modal hazmat 

freight transport

Indiana: $8.4M

Connecting the Crossroads 

of America

Improves safety along 

approximately 70 miles of 

hazmat routing

PROJECT EXAMPLES

Track Upgrades/

Improvements 

$189.5M

RCE

$573.3M

Available Funding
Assessing	the	Effect	of	Five	Gasoline	Properties	on	Exhaust	Emissions	from	LightDuty	Vehicles	certified	to	Tier-2	Standards

Analysis	of	Data	from	EPA	Phase	3

(EPAct/V2/E-89)

APPENDIX		D

Influential	Measurements
As described in Section 5.2, individual measurements were designated as “influential” on the 

basis of their externally-studentized residuals, also known as “studentized-deleted residuals” (r-i). 

Specifically, measurements were designated as “influential” if the absolute value of their 

externally-studentized residual was greater than or equal to 3.5 (| r-i| ≥ 3.5).

Models used to assess the influence of measurements were run as described in Section 5 of the 

report (Preliminary Modeling). No influential measurements were identified for THC, CO, 

NMOG or NMHC. Influential measurements identified for NOx and PM are listed below.

Influential Measurements identified for NOx.

Influential Measurements identified for PM.

Bag Run Test VehID Fuel Result (g/mi) ln(Result) ln(predicted) studentizeddeleted residual

1 6277 EPA-TSIE-P3-22-T1 TSIE 22 0.000902908 -7.0099 -5.22857 -3.5987

1 6533 EPA-FFOC-P3-28-T1 FFOC 28 0.000847845 -7.0728 -5.08724 -4.0166

1 6751 EPA-FFOC-P3-30-T2 FFOC 30 0.000232146 -8.3681 -5.16664 -5.2169

2 4487 EPA-CCOB-P3-2-T2 CCOB 2 0.0001156 -9.0654 -7.95077 -3.5899

2 6068 EPA-CCOB-P3-3-T1 CCOB 3 0.0000383 -10.17 -7.98439 -4.5309

2 5599 EPA-CCOB-P3-9-T1 CCOB 9 0.000077 -9.4717 -8.00687 -3.8964

2 5323 EPA-CCOB-P3-11-T2 CCOB 11 0.000112945 -9.0886 -7.81835 -3.7259

2 7249 EPA-CCOB-P3-15-T3 CCOB 15 0.000114047 -9.0789 -7.86428 -3.6768

2 6215 EPA-CCOB-P3-24-T2 CCOB 24 0.0000779 -9.4601 -7.86604 -4.011

2 6114 EPA-CCOB-P3-28-T2 CCOB 28 0.000153045 -8.7848 -7.76176 -3.5099

Composite 6507 EPA-FFOC-P3-7-T2 FFOC 7 0.000775381 -7.1622 -6.1095 -3.6933

Composite 6873 EPA-FFOC-P3-21-T2 FFOC 21 0.001069327 -6.8407 -5.90448 -3.5281

Bag Run Test VehID Fuel Result

(mg/mi)

ln(Result) ln(predicted) studentizeddeleted residual

1 6247 EPA-JLIB-P3-16-T1 JLIB 16 412.589 6.02245 2.33482 4.4539

2 5324 EPA-FEXP-P3-27-T2 FEXP 27 110.019 4.70066 -1.94501 4.2667

Composite 5735 EPA-JLIB-P3-2MP-T1 JLIB 2 18.561 2.92104 0.72895 3.7902

Composite 7309 EPA-TCOR-P3-13-T2 TCOR 13 0.01 -4.5749 -1.31976 -4.246

Composite 6247 EPA-JLIB-P3-16-T1 JLIB 16 21.588 3.07216 0.85548 3.8052

Composite 5491 EPA-TSIE-P3-24-T1 TSIE 24 0.005 -5.2755 -1.5697 -4.3588

Composite 5324 EPA-FEXP-P3-27-T2 FEXP 27 96.813 4.57278 -1.18185 5.3019

Composite 8059 EPA-TCOR-P3-28-T2 TCOR 28 0.008 -4.8085 -1.66995 -4.1273
(Reap. Dec. 9743)

#### Sears, Roebuck & Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 6619, etc.

(Decided July 14, 1960)

*Lane, Young & Fox*for the plaintiff.

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

Rao, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed on schedule A, hereto annexed and made part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the above appeals for reappraisement consists of bamboo blinds and sets of hardware accessories imported from Japan; and that each bamboo blind, as invoiced, is accompanied by one set of hardware accessories.

> That on or about the dates of exportation of the merchandise hereinbefore described, such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, including the cost *428of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, at the appraised unit values, packed; that said unit values include the cost of the sets of hardware accessories, which eo'st is 3 cents (U.S. Oy) per set of hardware accessories; and there [sic] there was no higher foreign value.

> That the above appeals for reappraisement are limited to the merchandise hereinbefore described and are abandoned as to all other merchandise; and that said appeals may be deemed to be submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find export value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved and that such values were the appraised unit values, packed, which said unit values include the costs of the sets of hardware accessories of 8 cents (TJ.S. currency) per set.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
A89A0508.

#### BAKER v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY et al.

(395 SE2d 670)

Decided May 15, 1990.

*Kelly, Denny, Pease & Allison, Paul R. Bennett,*for appellant.

Birdsong, Judge.

This case initially came before us as an appeal from a judgment granting appellee’s motion to dismiss an appeal for unreasonable and inexcusable delay in the filing of the transcript. In *Baker v. Southern R. Co.,*192 Ga. App. 444 (385 SE2d 125), we affirmed the judgment of the trial court, holding that the trial court’s findings were not erroneous, and that appellant had failed to establish that the trial court abused its discretion. In *Baker v. Southern R. Co.,*260 Ga. 115 (390 SE2d 576), the Supreme Court remanded our judgment with direction, holding that the trial court failed to make a specific finding that the failure to file timely the transcript was caused by appellant Baker and directing that the case be remanded for further action by the trial court in accordance with its opinion. See generally *Wagner v. Howell,*257 Ga. 801 (363 SE2d 759) (setting forth the three criteria for dismissal of an appeal for failure timely to file a transcript).

Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of the trial court, and remand the case with direction that the trial court make those specific findings required by the Supreme Court, and thereafter enter those rulings, orders, or judgments deemed appropriate, in the exercise of its sound discretion, and not inconsistent with the holding of the majority of the Supreme Court, 260 Ga. 115, supra.

*Judgment vacated and case remanded with direction.*

*Deen, P. J., and Cooper, J., concur.*

*648*Neely & Player, Edgar A. Neely III, Tami L. Brown, William C. Thompson,*for appellees.
Exhibit 10(c)





FIRST ADDENDUM TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT





Premises:
2706-10 Fox Street;2900-40 Fox Street;2701 W


Hunting Park Ave.;2711 W. Hunting Park


Ave.; 2729-33 W. Hunting Park Ave.;


2749 W. Hunting Park Ave.; 2801 W. Hunting


Park Ave.; 2803 W. Hunting Park Ave.;2851-55


W. Hunting Park Ave, all in Philadelphia, Pa.





Seller:
Tasty Baking CompanyBuyer:
TKMG Associates, L.P.








Date of Purchase and Sale Agreement (the "Agreement"): April 5, 2010




Date of First Addendum:                                                                            July 2, 2010





Seller and Buyer, intending to be legally bound hereby, agree to the following:





1.           Binding Amendment.  This First Addendum to Purchase and Sale Agreement shall bind the Buyer and Seller. To the extent this First Addendum is inconsistent with the Agreement this First Addendum shall control. All other terms, conditions, and provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect to the extent not amended by this First Addendum. Capitalized terms which are not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the Agreement.





2.           Extension of Feasibility Period. The Agreement is hereby amended to provide that the Feasibility Period is extended to July 30, 2010. However, the date of Settlement will not be affected by this extension.





3           Deposit.  Commencing on July 7, 2010, $25,000 of the Initial Deposit shall become non refundable but still applied to the Purchase Price. Thus, if Buyer terminates the Agreement pursuant to the terms of the Feasibility Paragraph 3 of the Agreement on or after July 7, 2010 but on or before July 30, 2010, Seller shall be entitled to $25,000 of the Initial Deposit and the remaining $75,000 of the Initial Deposit shall be returned to the Buyer.





4.           Zoning.  Buyer and Seller agree that the Zoning Condition has been satisfied.





5.           Counterparts.  This First Addendum may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original fully executed First Addendum.











Telefax or Electronic signatures shall be taken as originals, and shall be followed by manually executed copies.











IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each party hereto, being authorized to do so and intending to be legally bound hereby, has duly executed and entered into this First Addendum to Purchase and Sale Agreement on the date set forth above.




SELLER:Tasty Baking CompanyBy: /s/Laurence WeilheimerName: Laurence WeilheimerTitle: Sr. Vice PresidentBUYER:TKMG Associates, L.P.By TK GP, Inc.By: /s/Richard A. KooryRichard A. KooryGeneral CounselGUARANTORMetro Development CompanyBy Richard A. KooryRichard A. KooryGeneral Counsel
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 130217(56) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, OCWEN FEDERAL BANK, FSB, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 130217 COA: 249081 St Clair CC: 01-003301-CH INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN MUSIC MINISTRY, INC., d/b/a LATE NIGHT PRAISE AND WORSHIP, and PERCY L. LEWIS, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reco nsideration of this Co urt’s order of April 28, 2006 is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.

d0724 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 31, 2006

Clerk
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# Where do they go in winter?

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  Where do they go in winter? 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
                    -           Publisher        
                    -  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1980-1990 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  137 × 44 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Ideal Contex Magnum G600 54 Plus at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at the University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  MapsPosters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  019642857.jpg; 019642857.jpg 

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -
Exhibit 32.1**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS**     Carl E. Sassano, the Chief Executive Officer of Transcat, Inc. and John J. Zimmer, the ChiefFinancial Officer of Transcat, Inc. certify that (i) the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for thefirst quarter ended June 24, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the quarterly report onForm 10-Q for the first quarter ended June 24, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of Transcat, Inc.     Date: August 8, 2006 /s/ Carl E. Sassano         Carl E. Sassano    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer       Date: August 8, 2006 /s/ John J. Zimmer         John J. Zimmer    Vice President of Finance and    Chief Financial Officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 has been provided to Transcat, Inc. and will be retained by Transcat, Inc. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-30432

Summary Calendar

ULYSSES HILL,

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

DARREL VANNOY, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY,

Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:18-CV-249

Before JONES, HIGGINSON, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ulysses Hill, Louisiana prisoner # 336638, was convicted of seconddegree murder and sentenced to serve life in prison. Now, following the district 

court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition, he moves this 

court for a certificate of appealability (COA) on claims concerning ineffective 

assistance of counsel, evidentiary sufficiency, and a fair trial. 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 30, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-30432 Document: 00515400425 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/30/2020
No. 19-30432

2

To obtain a COA, one must make “a substantial showing of the denial of 

a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To satisfy that burden, he must 

show that “reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the 

constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000), or that the issues he presents “are adequate to deserve 

encouragement to proceed further,” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 

(2003). Because Hill fails to make the required showing with respect to the 

above-listed claims, his COA motion is DENIED. See id.

Finally, Hill contends that the district court erred by denying his § 2254 

petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing. He is not required to 

obtain a COA to appeal the denial of an evidentiary hearing; therefore, to the 

extent he seeks a COA on this issue we construe his COA request “as a direct 

appeal from the denial of an evidentiary hearing.” Norman v. Stephens, 817 

F.3d 226, 234 (5th Cir. 2016). Hill has not shown that the district court abused 

its discretion in denying his request for an evidentiary hearing. See Cullen v. 

Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170, 185-86 (2011); Blue v. Thaler, 665 F.3d 647, 655-56 

(5th Cir. 2011); § 2254(d), (e)(2). The district court’s denial of an evidentiary 

hearing is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 19-30432 Document: 00515400425 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/30/2020