alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration # 10862 and # 10863]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Texas (FEMA-1697-DR), dated 05/01/2007. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storms and Tornadoes. *Incident Period:*
                         04/21/2007 through 04/24/2007. *Effective Date:*
                         05/01/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         07/02/2007. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         02/01/2008.
 ADDRESSES: *Submit completed loan applications to:*
                         U.S. Small Business Administration Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 05/01/2007, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. *The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:* Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Maverick, Moore, Swisher. Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only): Texas, Armstrong, Briscoe, Carson, Castro, Dallam, Dimmit, Floyd, Hale, Hansford, Hartley, Hutchinson, Kinney, Oldham, Potter, Randal, Sherman, Uvalde, Webb, Zavala. *The Interest Rates are:* PercentFor Physical Damage:Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.750Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.875Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere
8.000Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.250Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000For Economic Injury:Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 10862C and for economic injury is 108630.
 (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. E7-8829 Filed 5-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Carlos MATA GALVEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-50131.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 1, 2005.*

Decided Aug. 4, 2005.

As Amended on Denial of Rehearing Oct. 21, 2005.

*766Daniel N. Shallman, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Phillip A. Trevino, Esq., Law Offices of Phillip A. Trevino, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CALLAHAN and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suit*766able for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Carlos Mata Galvez appeals his conviction and 21-month sentence imposed following a guilty plea to conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, and fraud and misuse of entry documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546.

Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Galvez has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Galvez has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. The government has not filed an answering brief.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no grounds for relief. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the *767courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Your right to federal records.**
 
1992 |1996|2009 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2009| 2011
 
SuDoc Number:GS 1.2:F 31/2/
Item Number:0559 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001083271
 
October 19, 2018
#### F. W. Woolworth Co. *v.*United States

No. 6105.

Invoice dated Sonneberg, Germany, May 20, 1939.

Certified May 24, 1939.

Entered at Boston, Mass., June 14, 1939.

Entry No. 14398/1.

(Decided February 26, 1945)

*Sharretts & Hillis (Edward P. Sharretts*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Bao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Daniel I. Auster,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Kincheloe, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, that the facts and circumstances relating to the item of 10 per centum commission ,in the case listed in the annexed schedule; identified on the invoice with “xx” in green ink and the initials T. A. McC. of Examiner Timothy A. McCarthy, are in all material respects the same as the facts and circumstances relating to the item of 10 per centum commission specified in the invoices relating to glass tree ornaments, novelties, and figures covered by reappraisements 113038-A, 113040-A, and 113468-A of the F. W. Woolworth Co. and passed upon by the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals in *United States*v. *S. S. Kresge Co., B. Shackman & Co., Rice & Co. Corp., Strauss-Eckardt Co., Inc., F. W. Woolworth Co.,*26 C. C. P. A. 349, 352, wherein the court held that “A purchasing commission, charged for the handling of merchandise, is not a proper part of dutiable value.”

> *351It is further stipulated and agreed that on the date of exportation of the merchandise involved in the case listed in the annexed schedule, identified on the invoices with “xx” in green ink and the initials T. A. McC. of Examiner Timothy A. McCarthy, articles such, and similar -thereto were freely offered for sale and sold to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country of exportation in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States at the per *se*unit invoice prices, plus *3%*per centum social assessments for insurance, vacation, and holiday costs, plus packing, as invoiced, and that there was no higher foreign value.

> As to all other items, the appeal is abandoned.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that the record in *United States*v. *S. S. Kresge Co. et al.,*26 C. C. P. A. 349, 352, be incorporated herein and that the said appeal to reappraisement is submitted on this stipulation.

Qn 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 represented on the invoice by the items marked “xx” in green ink and the initials T. A. McC. of Examiner Timothy A. McCarthy, and that such val- • ues are the *per se*unit.invoice prices, plus *3%*per centum social assessments for insurance, vacation, and holiday costs, plus packing, as invoiced.

The appeal having been abandoned insofar as it relates to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeal is hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS OF TE XAS

N O . A P - 76, 125

EX PA R TE M A R C U S PR I N C E , A ppl i c ant

ON AP P LI CAT I ON F OR A W RI T OF HABE AS CORP US C A U SE N O . C - 3- 008694- 1012736- A I N T H E C R I M I N A L D I ST R I C T C O U R T #3 FROM TARRA NT CO UNTY

P er cur i am . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Crim i n al P ro ce dure, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habe as cor

pus. Ex pa rte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant plea ded g uilty to the offe nse of failure to comply

with se x offe nder r eg istration require ments, enhanc ed by a prior f elony conviction, and wa s sentence d to four y ear s’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction. Applicant conte nds, int e r a lia , that his plea wa s involuntary and his sentenc e unauthor ized, be c a u s e h e w a s c h ar g e d w it

h f a il in g to r e g is te r u n d e r th e in c o r r e c t s e c ti o n o f th e T e xa s Co d e of Cr imi na l P roce dure . T he tr ia l c ourt de te rm ine d th a tAp pli c ant i s c or re c t, i n th a t th e of

fe ns e wi th2

which he w as cha

rg ed should have been a

state jail felony , not a third deg ree felony

. Fur thermore , the pr ior fe lony c on vic tio n us e d to e nh anc e d his punis hme nt r ang e wo uld no t ha ve be e n u sa

ble to enhanc e the pr imary

offe nse had it be en proper ly char g ed. Applicant was char g ed with the wr ong deg ree of offe nse, and was a dmonished as to an incor rec t punishment rang e. Applica nt is entitl ed to relief. Ex

pa rteHu e rta , 6 92 S.W. 2d 68 1 (T e x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 85 ); Ex parte Ric h , 194 S.W .3d 508, 515 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Relief is g rante d. The judg ment in Cau s e No

. C-3-008694-1012736- A in the Criminal District Court #3 of Tarr ant County is set aside, and A

pplicant i s re m anded to the c ustody of the sh e ri ff of Ta rr ant County

to a ns we r t he c ha rg e s a s se t out in

the ind ic tme nt. Copies of t

h is o p in io n

s h a ll b e s e nt to the T exas Depar tment of Criminal J ustice–Corre ctional I nstitut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Deliver ed: April 1, 2009 Do No t Pu

bli sh
Case No. 13,947.

#### THOMPSON v. CARENOUGH.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 267.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term, 1805.

Bail in Civil Case — Return—Appearance.

If there be no declaration the court will not require special bail, unless the plaintiff appears at the return of the writ.

Assumpsit. No declaration filed; but the plaintiff had ordered the writ in person and had filed an account, sworn to. The marshal brought in the defendant. The plaintiff, being called, and not appearing, and having employed no attorney, THE COURT did not order the defendant to give bail, nor to be committed; but permitted the defendant’s appearance to be taken without bail.
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

                    The NSF management officials having responsibility Advisory Committee for International Science and Engineering (#25104) have determined that renewing this group for another two years is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed upon the Director, National Science Foundation by 42 U.S.C. 1861*et seq.*                     This determination follows consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services Administration.                

Effective date for renewal is May 23, 2007. For more information contact Susanne Bolton at (703) 292-7488.

Dated: May 4, 2007.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

 [FR Doc. E7-8857 Filed 5-8-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
#### English *versus*Sprague.

An action, originating in a justice’s court, cannot be brought to this court, by appeal from a judgment of the District Court, on a demurrer in law, or upon an agreed statement of facts.

The remedy is by exceptions.

Assumpsit commenced before a justice of the peace, and brought to this court by an appeal from a judgment, rendered by the District Court upon an agreed statement of facts.

Shepley, C. J.

The case is irregularly here. It should have come up by exceptions. In a suit originating in a justice’s court, where the question is upon a demurrer in law, or upon facts agreed, the statute gives no appeal to this court.

Consent of the parties cannot confer jurisdiction.

*Action dismissed.*
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

DERRICK DESHAWN SHEFFIELD, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-198 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed August 23, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Ronald Ficarrotta, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Robert D. Rosen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Carolyn Snurkowski, Associate Deputy Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Linsey Sims-Bohnenstiehl, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

VILLANTI, ATKINSON, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
Recycled Paper www.mde.maryland.gov TTY Users 1-800-735-2258 Via Maryland Relay Service 

## MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
1800 Washington Boulevard  Baltimore MD 21230

410-537-3000  1-800-633-6101  www.mde.maryland.gov

June 25, 2015

CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION

This is to certify that the “Maryland Departme nt of the Environment (MDE) Notice of Public Hearings/Comment Periods Concerning: Amendm ents to Regulation .26 and new Regulation .26-1 under COMAR 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes to adopt new volatile organic compound (VOC) limits, standards for applic ation methods, and work practice requirements

which are consistent with the most recen t EPA Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) recommendations applicable to fiberglass boat manufacturing was published on MDE’s website on June 25, 2015. The noice will remain posted on the site until July 29, 2015.

The notice in full with links to supporting documents may be f ound in the following web address:

http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/re gulations/air/Pages/reqcomments.aspx

Web publication of the notice was at the request of Carolyn Jones, P.E., Regulations Coordinator of the Air and Radiation Manageme nt Administration of MDE.

By:

Joseph E. Herb, Jr.

MDE Webmaster

Attachments:

Copy of web page as published. Larry Hogan

Governor

Boyd Rutherford

Lieutenant Governor Ben Grumbles Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                         <C>                <C>                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>               3-MOS              6-MOS               YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>      DEC-31-1998           DEC-31-1998        DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>           JUN-30-1998           JUN-30-1998        DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                         0              3,722,991          1,454,456
<SECURITIES>                   0                      0                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                  0                      0                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                   0                      0                  0
<INVENTORY>                    0                      0                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>               0              5,146,935          2,803,522
<PP&E>                         0                      0                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                 0                      0                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 0              5,146,935          2,803,522
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          0                  8,446             30,606
<BONDS>                        0                      0                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>          0                      0                  0
<PREFERRED>                    0                      0                  0
<COMMON>                       0                      0                  0
<OTHER-SE>                     0              5,138,489          2,772,916
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   0              5,146,935          2,803,522
<SALES>                        0                      0                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>          43,943                 61,562                  0
<CGS>                          0                      0                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  0                      0                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>          50,821                 69,897                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>               0                      0                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>             0                      0                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>           57,095              2,365,573                  0
<INCOME-TAX>              57,095              2,365,573                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            0                      0                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                 0                      0                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                0                      0                  0
<CHANGES>                      0                      0                  0
<NET-INCOME>              57,095              2,365,573                  0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                  0                      0                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                  0                      0                  0
        

</TABLE>
PVAwPVAc.txt

Modifications of poly(vinyl alcohol) for use in poly(vinyl acetate) emulsion wood adhesives

Lijun Qiao, Phil K. Coveny, Allan J. Easteal

Pigment & Resin Technology 31(2) 88 - 95 [2002]

ISSN: 0369-9420 DOI: 10.1108/03699420210420378

Abstract:

Modifications of poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) can improve the properties and performance of 

poly(vinyl acetate) (PVAc) emulsions stabilized with these modified colloids. Water resistance 

and toughness of the emulsions as wood adhesives can be achieved through chemical 

reactions of the hydroxy groups of the colloid with various modifiers. The chemical changes 

can be carried out either in the preparation of PVA through hydrolysis of copolymers of vinyl 

acetate and other monomers, or by the reaction of modifiers with PVA aqueous solutions. The 

modified PVAc emulsions show better properties than those of the conventional emulsions in 

performance tests and applications. The modified colloids are becoming increasingly used in 

the manufacture of PVAc emulsions in the adhesive industry, because of their advantages 

over emulsions made using conventional (unmodified) PVA. The trend of current research is to

introduce more functionality into the colloid, so that the traditional protective colloids can be 

modified to function as crosslinkers and chain transfer agents. 

Page 1
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 2042** 

In re: RANDOLPH HARRIS AUSTIN, a/k/a Randolph Harris, a/k/a Matarbus Raynard Fewell ,
Petitioner
.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus . ( 3:05

- cr - 00213

- RJC

- DCK

- 1; 3:11

- cv - 00040

- RJC )

Submitted : December 17, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion
. Randolph Harris Austin , Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Randolph Harris Austin petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (201 2 ) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We find the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis , we deny the mandamus petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would

n ot aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                            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 of United Refining Company, (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending February 28, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
John A. Catsimatidis, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to my
knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
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 /  John A. Catsimatidis
                                           --------------------------
                                           John A. Catsimatidis
                                           Principal Executive Officer
                                           April 14, 2003











A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to United Refining Company and will be retained by United Refining
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.