alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MEMORANDUM

To: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0451 

 Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0215 

From: Hillary Ward, U.S. EPA, OAQPS, Sector Policies and Programs Division 

Subject: Stakeholder Meeting on June 23, 2015 

Meeting time: 10:30 – 11 am

Hillary Ward and Karen Marsh of EPA/SPPD met with the following attendees and 

discussed the following topics on the upcoming rulemakings for Municipal Solid Waste 

(MSW) Landfills Emission Guidelines and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). 

Attendees List: 

Hillary Ward, EPA/SPPD

Karen Marsh, EPA/SPPD

Kerry Kelly, Waste Management

Amy Banister, Waste Management

Steve Niehoff, Waste Management

Dave Thorley, Waste Management

Niki Wuestenberg, Republic Services

Topics: 

Design capacity

Emission threshold

Surface monitoring using EPA Method 21 versus the California Landfill Methane Rule 

Landfill gas treatment

Installation and expansion timelines

Wellhead monitoring

Organics diversion

 1
No. 74-916.

#### Radisich *v.*Radisich.

Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DALIA ISRAEL,

Appellant,

v.

EBHC, LLC as trustee of THE EBHC, LLC LAND TRUST,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-1096

[November 17, 2022]

Appeal from the County Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Sara Alijewicz, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502020CC002479XXXXWB.

Bart T. Heffernan, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, MAY and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# C_2015320EN.01002701.xml

| 28.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 320/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 320/27

---

Order of the General Court of 16 July 2015 — PAN Europe and Stichting Natuur en Milieu v Commission

(Case T-574/12) (1)

1

((Environment - Regulation (EC) No 149/2008 - Maximum residue levels for pesticides - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Request for internal review - No further interest in bringing an action - No need to adjudicate))

(2015/C 320/42)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) (Brussels, Belgium) and Stichting Natuur en Milieu (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: F. Martens, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, B. Burggraaf, P. Ondrůšek and G. von Rintelen, subsequently, B. Burggraaf, G. von Rintelen and P. Oliver, and, lastly, G. von Rintelen, H. Kranenborg and L. Pignataro-Nolin, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of 16 October 2012 whereby the Commission dismissed as unfounded the applicants’ requests for internal review of Commission Regulation (EC) No 149/2008 of 29 January 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing Annexes II, III and IV setting maximum residue levels for products covered by Annex I thereto (OJ 2008 L 58, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.

| 2. | Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) and Stichting Natuur en Milieu shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) and Stichting Natuur en Milieu shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.

1

---
Parraguirre

hearing. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Kathleen E. Delaney, Judge.

Because no statute or court rule permits an appeal from an order denying the abovementioned motions, we lack jurisdiction. Castillo v. State, 106 Nev. 349, 352, 792 P.2d 1133, 1135 (1990). Accordingly, we

ORDER these appeals DISMISSED.



# g reed00/41 . Pickering e3/4.

cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge Earnest Phillips Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2

(0) 1947A c4COM
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
          I, Julianne M. Biagini, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Endwave Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report on Form 10-Q/A does not contain any untruestatement 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 on Form 10-Q/A.        Date: August 4, 2004 /s/    JULIANNE M. BIAGINI   Julianne M. Biagini   Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 32

                             CERTIFICATE 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 Advanced Technologies Group, Ltd.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended October 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), each of the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies 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
          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 result of operations of
          the Company.

Date: December 8, 2005                  By: /s/ Abel Raskas
                                            ---------------------------------
                                            Abel Raskas
                                            President


Date: December 8, 2005                  By: /s/ Alex Stelmak
                                            ---------------------------------
                                            Alex Stelmak
                                            Chief Financial Officer
#### Bloomingdale Bros. et al. *v.*United States

No. 6537.

Entry No. 752908, etc.

Invoices dated Melbourne, Derbyshire, England, April 18, 1942, etc.

Certified April 18, 1942, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., June 1, 1942, etc.

(Decided November 22, 1946)

*John D. Bode*for the plaintiffs.

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

Tilson, Judge:

The record upon which the appeals listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision shows that the issues herein and the issues in *United States*v. *Pitcairn,*C. A. D. 334, are the same in all material respects, and the record therein has been admitted in evidence herein.

Upon the established facts and following the authority cited, I find and hold the proper dutiable export values of the merchandise covered by said appeals to be the values found by the appraiser, less any additions made by the importers on entry to meet advances made by the appraiser in similar cases then pending on appeal. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Military Sealift Command Team Gets Operation Deep Freeze Cargo Underway

By Sarah BurfordMSC Pacific Public Affairs

                PORT HUENEME, Calif  –              *Editor's note: The original story can be viewed on the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command website.*

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

Operation Deep FreezeNational Science Foundationcargodispositionequipment disposition
**EXHIBIT 23.1**
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLICACCOUNTANTS**
     We consent to the incorporation by reference inthe Registration Statements on Form S-8Nos. 333-30976, 333-47101, 33-56615 and 333-56675 andForm S-3 No. 333-84461, of U.S. Industries, Inc., of ourreport dated November 8, 2002, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements and schedule of U.S.Industries, Inc. included in this Annual Report onForm 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2002, filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission.
 /s/ Ernst & Young LLP    
West Palm Beach, FloridaDecember 20, 2002
No. A-728.

#### B. Coleman Corp. et al. *v.*Walker et al.

C. A. 7th Cir. Application for stay or for injunction, presented to Mr. Justice Marshall, and by him referred to the Court, denied.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 9, 2020

No. 04-19-00873-CR

Anthony Arlanders ROSS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CR12490

The Honorable Velia J. Meza, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Sachiko Nagao‘s Notification of Late Reporter’s Record is this date NOTED. The 

Reporter’s Record must be filed no later than March 16, 2020.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 9th day of March, 2020.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ,

Clerk of Court
# C_2014071EN.01003203.xml

| 8.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/32

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 7.11.2013

Cortivo v Parliament

(Case F-52/12) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Pensions - Correction coefficient - Member State of residence - Concept - Principal residence - Residence shared between Member States - Documents in support - Legitimate expectations)

(2014/C 71/62)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Maria Luisa Cortivo (Sagone, France) (represented by: A. Salerno, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Ecker and S. Alves, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment, first, of the decision fixing the applicant’s main place of residence in Luxembourg; and, second, of the decision modifying the applicant’s pension entitlements by withdrawing the correction coefficient for France as from 1 January 2010.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application;

| 2. | Orders Ms Cortivo to bear her own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ms Cortivo to bear her own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament.

---

(1)  OJ C 200, 7.7.2012 p. 22.

---
# C_2013367EN.01002801.xml

| 14.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 367/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 367/28

---

Order of the General Court of 24 October 2013 — Stromberg Menswear v OHIM — Leketoy Stormberg Inter (STORMBERG)

(Case T-451/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Earlier Community word mark STORMBERG - Surrender of the disputed mark by the proprietor - Decision to close the revocation proceedings - Request for restitutio in integrum - Obligation to state reasons - Articles 58(1), 76(1) and 81(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

2013/C 367/50

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Stromberg Menswear Ltd (Leeds, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Tsoutsanis, lawyer, and C. Tulley, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Leketoy Stormberg Inter AS (Kristiansand S, Norway) (represented initially by T. Mølsgaard, and subsequently by J. Løje, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 August 2012 (Case R 389/2012-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Stromberg Menswear Ltd and Leketoy Stormberg Inter AS.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Stromberg Menswear Ltd shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Stromberg Menswear Ltd shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.

1

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Michael Scibella, Defendant.

District Court of Nassau County,

February 7, 1966.

*Sidney Sparrow*for defendant. *William Calm, District Attorney (Vincent Starace*of counsel), for plaintiff.

Francis J. Donovan, J.

Defendant moves, on consent of the District Attorney, to plead guilty to a violation of subdivision 11 of section 722 of the Penal Law in satisfaction of an infor*101mation charging defendant with a violation of subdivision 1 of section 580 and section 986 of the Penal Law.

This case presents a question as to the power of the court to accept a plea lesser than the crime set forth in the information. Such procedure presents no problem in the County Court.

Section 342-a of the Code of Criminal Procedure sets forth the procedure where the court accepts a plea of guilty to a lesser charge. The forms of plea are authorized or prescribed by section 334 of the code. Section 62 of the Code of Criminal Procedure carries over and makes section 334 applicable to this court. If there be any doubt of this court’s power under section 334 of the code, as supplemented or implemented by 342-a of the code, I think it is dispelled by the Uniform District Court Act.

Section 2005 of the Uniform District Court Act provides that this court has the power to dismiss the prosecution of an action in like manner as the prosecution of actions by indictment may be dismissed. Pleading to lesser charges involves (1) the dismissal of the basic charge and (2) substitution of a lesser one, and is therefore covered in substance by section 2005 of the Uniform District Court Act.

The recent case of the *People*v. *O’Connor*(14 N Y 2d 62), decided February 27, 1964 by the -Court of Appeals, discussed the procedure. While that ease involved the Special Sessions Court in New York City, yet outlining the statutory language above stated, I think the procedure is substantially the same. The court held a plea to disorderly conduct could be taken in satisfaction of an information, on oral statements on the record.

I will accept that procedure here. On the District Attorney’s consent, we will state, orally on the record, the facts which constitute the substance of the violation to which defendant will plead.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Labor Requirements for School Construction

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Labor Requirements for School Construction : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1299*,												Washington, D.C: 								G.P.O., 										July 1961,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4566,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
# C_2012138EN.01003601.xml

| 12.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/36

---

Action brought on 27 February 2012 — ZZ v Parliament

(Case F-24/12)

(2012/C 138/83)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Tymen and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision adopted by the President of the European Parliament reassigning the applicant within the same Directorate-General of the Parliament from the post of Head of Unit to a post of Advisor to the Director of a Directorate and the claim for compensation for psychological harassment.

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the President of the European Parliament of 16 January 2012 which terminated, with retroactive effect from 1 January 2012, the applicant’s duties as Head of Unit for Equality and Diversity in DG Personnel and which transferred him, from that date, to Directorate D of that DG as Advisor, and at the same time withdrew the benefit of the allowance for Heads of Unit; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the President of the European Parliament of 16 January 2012 which terminated, with retroactive effect from 1 January 2012, the applicant’s duties as Head of Unit for Equality and Diversity in DG Personnel and which transferred him, from that date, to Directorate D of that DG as Advisor, and at the same time withdrew the benefit of the allowance for Heads of Unit;

| — | Grant the applicant damages in compensation for harm suffered for an amount assessed on an equitable basis at EUR 50 000; |
| --- | --- |

—

Grant the applicant damages in compensation for harm suffered for an amount assessed on an equitable basis at EUR 50 000;

| — | Order the Parliament to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Parliament to pay the costs.

---
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Unemployment and Its Effect on Family Income in 1980

              																																																			Terry, Sylvia Lazos					 and 	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics.								*Unemployment and Its Effect on Family Income in 1980 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 2148*.															Washington, D.C: 										U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 												September 1982,												https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5215,				accessed on September 25, 2024.										    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
No. 96-1116.

#### Aircraft Braking Systems Corp. *v.*Local 856, International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers, et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.