alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

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

# Voyager at Uranus: rings

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  Voyager at Uranus: rings 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  Jet Propulsion Laboratory (U.S.) 
                    -           Publisher        
                    -  National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1980-1990 
                    -           Subject: Place        
                    -  Uranus (Planet) 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  159 × 89 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)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  018161768.jpg 
                    -           OCLC Collection Number        
                    -  429489521 

                - 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 20.1

Subsidiaries of FS Energy and Power Fund



Name of Subsidiary

State of Incorporation or OrganizationBerwyn Funding LLC

DelawareBryn Mawr Funding LLC

DelawareEP Altus Investments, LLC

DelawareEP American Energy Investments, Inc.

DelawareEP Burnett Investments, Inc.

DelawareEP Northern Investments, LLC

DelawareEP Synergy Investments, Inc.

DelawareFoxfields Funding LLC

DelawareFS Energy Investments, LLC

DelawareFS Power Investments, LLC

DelawareFSEP Investments, Inc.

DelawareFSEP Term Funding, LLC

DelawareFSEP-BBH, Inc.

DelawareGladwyne Funding LLC

Delaware


---



QuickLinks
(Reap. Dec. 8905)

Entry No. 709717, etc.

#### Chrislite Corp. *v.*United States

(Decided July 10, 1957)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn*for the plaintiff.

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

Wilson, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule *“A”*hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in Schedule A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, consist of electric bulbs from Japan.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, that the appraised values of the merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement enumerated herein, less the amount of buying commission as noted on the invoices, is equal to the market value or 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 Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, packing included

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that on or about the date of exportation such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale for home consumption in Japan.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeals to reap-praisement enumerated in Schedule A may be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the 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 values, less the amount of buying commission, as noted on the invoices.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v STANLEY J. STANASZEK, Acting Corporal, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant

12 USCMA 408, 30 CMR 408

No. 14,928

Decided May 26, 1961

*Lieutenant Colonel R. G. Coyne,*USMC, was on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Captain Warren C. Kiraeofe,*USN, was on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

This accused was tried by general court-martial and found guilty of desertion, in violation of Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 85, 10 USC § 885, and failure to obey a lawful order, in violation of Code, supra, Article 92, 10 USC § 892. The order allegedly violated involved the accused’s duty to report back to his station. Rather than obey it, he absented himself without leave with the appropriate intent and thereby committed the offense of de*409sertion of which he was also found guilty. The law officer instructed the court members that the offenses were separately punishable, and the issue of multiplicity was not raised either at the trial or at any other level. It is nevertheless axiomatic that the penalties may not be so aggregated. United States v Granger, 9 USCMA 719, 26 CMR 499; United States v Helfrick, 9 USCMA 221, 25 CMR 483.

The petition for review is granted and the decision of the board of review is reversed. The record of trial is returned for reassessment of the sentence in light of the multiplicious nature of the charges.
Philadelphia 1997 8-Hour Ozone SIP Revisions- Major Sources of NOx and/or VOC Not

Subject to Source-Specific RACT Determinations

Major Source Plant ID 

Number

Major 

Source 

Pollutant

SIP 

Revision

Applicable RACT 

Requirements

CTG Presump

-tive

SourceSpecific

Aker Philadelphia 

Shipyard, Inc.-

Philadelphia Naval 

Business Center

01569 VOC 2015 x x

Allied Tube & 

Conduit Corp. 03363 VOC 2016 x x

Cardone Industries 

Inc.- Rising Sun 

Avenue and Whitaker 

Avenue a

3887/ 

2287 VOC 2016 x x

Exelon Generating 

Company- Southwark

Station

04905 NOx 2015 x

Inolex Chemical 

Company 02059 NOx 2015 x

MIPC, LLC 05004 VOC 2016 x x

Naval Foundry and 

Propeller Center 09702 NOx 2016 x

Sunoco Partners 

Marketing & 

Terminals L.P.-

Belmont Terminal

01507 VOC 2015 x x

University of 

Pennsylvania 08912 NOx 2016 x

Notes: 

* All the RACT documentation that was submitted within the 2016 RACT SIP revision was initially submitted with 

the 2015 RACT SIP revision. The initial documentation submitted for each source has been superseded by 

documentation submitted within the 2016 RACT SIP revision; with exception of certain documentation for VeoliaEnergy Efficiency, LLC. For a list of documentation superseded by the 2016 SIP revision, refer to “EPA’s 

Clarification of Superseded Documentation in the 2015 SIP Revision” dated May 9, 2016.

* * This list was compiled by EPA.
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 6824

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. FURMAN BENJAMIN QUATTLEBAUM , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Columbia

. Cameron McGowan Currie , Senior District Judge. ( 3:02

- cr - 00548

- CMC

- 17; 3:17

- cv - 01533

- CMC )

Submitted : September 28, 2017 Decided: October 3, 2017

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Furman Benjamin Quattlebaum, Appellant Pro Se. Beth Drake, Acting United States Attorney, John C. Potterfield, Jane Barrett Taylor, Assistant United States Attor neys, Columbia, South Carolina, Carrie Fisher Sherard, Leesa Washington, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenvill e, South Carolina, for Appellee

. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Furman Benjamin Quattlebau m seeks to appeal the dist ric t court’s order construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as successive and unauthorized and dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner sati sfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322,
336

- 38 ( 2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U .S. at
484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Quattlebaum has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and l egal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

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

# Got a question? try this line get your free directory here, then call 697-2100, the US Postal Service information hotline

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  Got a question? try this line get your free directory here, then call 697-2100, the US Postal Service information hotline 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  United States Postal Service 
                    -           Publisher        
                    -  U.S. Postal Service 
                    -           Subjects        
                    -  United States Postal Service 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1980-1990 
                    -           Subject: Place        
                    -  United States 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  191 × 61 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)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  020765939.jpg 
                    -           OCLC Collection Number        
                    -  429489521 

                - 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
                -
December 14, 1971

No. 71-45

#### Martin S. Noble, SP-4, U. S. Army v LTG John J. Hay, Commanding General, Fort Bragg, North Carolina; MG George S. Blanchard, Commanding General, 82nd Airborne Division; LTC Joseph Lutz, Commanding Officer, 17th Cavalry-1st Squadron; MAJ Cornelius Creeden, Stockade Commander, Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

On consideration of the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, and of respondents’ Reply to the Order to Show Cause, with attached affidavits, filed in the above-entitled action, it appearing that Petitioner has been released from confinement, it is, by the Court, this 14th day of December 1971,

ORDERED:

That said Petition be, and the same is hereby, dismissed as moot. This action is without prejudice to the right of petitioner to raise any issue presented by the facts related in said Petition by appropriate motion presented to the military judge of the court-martial to which the pending charges have been, or may be referred for trial.
# C_2007297EN.01002702.xml

| 8.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/27

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 4 October 2007 — Health Research Inc.

(Case C-452/07)

(2007/C 297/44)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Health Research Inc.

Applicant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the ‘date on which the authorisation referred to in Article 3(b) to place the product on the market as a medicinal product was granted’, referred to in Article 7(1) of the Regulation (1), determined according to Community law or does that rule refer to the date on which the authorisation takes effect under the law of the Member State in question? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the ‘date on which the authorisation referred to in Article 3(b) to place the product on the market as a medicinal product was granted’, referred to in Article 7(1) of the Regulation (1), determined according to Community law or does that rule refer to the date on which the authorisation takes effect under the law of the Member State in question?

1

| 2. | If the Court's answer is that the date referred to in Question 1 is determined by Community law, which date must be taken into account for that purpose? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the Court's answer is that the date referred to in Question 1 is determined by Community law, which date must be taken into account for that purpose?

---

(1)  OJ L 182, p. 1.

1

---
July 8, 2015

Mr. Chris Barnett

3159 Redwood Ave

Grants Pass, OR 975727

Dear Mr. Barnett:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your June 29th 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

2308), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.
2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
Transport containers containing EMULGEN B - 66 18 kg Can(EMULGEN B - 66) Deionized water

Blending tank **measuring a** 

Worker exposure : Schematic Diagram of Typical treatment (colorant production processes)

1. No human exposure to substance contained in EMULGEN B - 66 by inhalation is expected during colorant production processes because the substance have low volatility and stable under normal conditions and all the processes are equipped with duct. (steps a - c ) 2. No human exposure to substance contained in EMULGEN B - 66 by direct contact is expected during measuring process because the workers involved in setting up the unloading operation would be expected to use splash goggles and appropriate gloves. (step a ) 3. No human exposure to substance contained in EMULGEN B - 66 by direct contact is expected during production and disposal processes because the processes are automated and no manual work is required. (steps b, c) Environmental release :

1. Release of substance contained in EMULGEN B - 66 to the environment is not expected during colorant production processes because all materials adhered to cloths and containers will be disposed by incineration (steps a-c ) 2. Release of substance contained in EMULGEN B - 66 to sewage is not expected during disposal process because blending tank is washed with water and is treated with wastewater treatment equipment by sludge treatment or adsorption treatment (step b) Dye, other materials 50 kg/day 2000 kg/day 500 kg/day

Blending
Filtration Packing
Colorant (Product) Washing (with 2000 kg water)

Wastewater

Treatment 5 kg/day 2005 kg/day (EMULGEN B - 66 : 50ppm) EMULGEN B - 66 contains Polyoxyethylene(14) tribenzylated phenyl ether

**production b**  **disposal c** 



### Equipped with duct
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 90 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make voting in a Federal 

election by an unlawfully present alien an aggravated felony, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 9, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make 

voting in a Federal election by an unlawfully present 

alien an aggravated felony, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Voter Integrity Protec5 tion Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. UNLAWFUL VOTING. 

7 (a) AGGRAVATED FELONY.—Section 101(a)(43) of 

8 the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 

9 1101(a)(43)) is amended— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 90 IH

1 (1) in subparagraph (T), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

2 the end; 

3 (2) in subparagraph (U), by striking the period 

4 at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

5 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(V) an offense described in section 611 of 

7 title 18, United States Code, committed by an 

8 alien who is unlawfully present in the United 

9 States.’’. 

10 (b) DEPORTABLE OFFENSE.—Section 237(a)(2) of 

11 the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 

12 1227(a)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the fol13 lowing: 

14 ‘‘(G) VOTING OFFENSES.—Any alien who 

15 is unlawfully present in the United States and 

16 who knowingly commits a violation of section 

17 611 of title 18, United States Code, is deport18 able.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
----

|   |   |                   |
|--------|--------|------------------------|
|   | By:    | /s/ Gary R. Vaughan    |
|   |   | Name: Gary R. Vaughan  |
|   |   | Its: Managing Director |
|   |   |                   |
|   | By:    | /s/ David Co           |
|   |   | Name: David Co         |
|   |   | Its: Director          |
|   |   |                   |
|   | By:    | /s/ Matt Bowen         |
|   |   | Name: Matt Bowen       |
|   |   | Its: Managing Director |
|   |   |                   |
|   | By:    | /s/ Kevin Fischer      |
|   |   | Name: Kevin Fischer    |
|   |   | Its: Director          |
|   |   |                   |
|   | By:    | /s/ Robert Frier       |
|   |   | Name: Robert Frier     |
|   |   | Its: Director          |

|   |   |                |
|--------|--------|---------------------|
|   | By:    | /s/ Jenna Kaufman   |
|   |   | Name: Jenna Kaufman |
|   |   | Its: Director       |

|  - 18 - |
|--------------|
# C_2008264EN.01S00301.xml

| 17.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Marc J. Falcone, certifythat: 

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No.1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Station Casinos LLC; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report. 

Date: May 1, 2017

/s/ Marc J. Falcone 

Marc J. Falcone 

Chief Financial Officer