alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, David Savitsky, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of ATC Healthcare, Inc.;

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

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

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

                  (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is
being prepared;

                  (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by
this report; and

                  (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

                  (a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

Date: _____, 2005
                                       /s/ DAVID SAVITSKY
                                       ------------------
                                       David Savitsky
                                       Chief Executive Officer


                                       50
EXHIBIT 23.1 - CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statement
(Form S-8 No.  333-56123)  pertaining to the  Bioanalytical  Systems,  Inc. 1997
Employee Incentive Stock Option Plan and in the Registration Statement (Form S-8
No.  333-56127)  pertaining  to the 1997  Bioanalytical  Systems,  Inc.  Outside
Director Stock Option Plan of our report dated November 1, 2001, with respect to
the   consolidated   financial   statements  of  Bioanalytical   Systems,   Inc.
incorporated  by  reference  in its 2001 Annual  Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended September 30, 2001 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Indianapolis, Indiana
December 27, 2001
Region 5 

77 West Jackson Boulevard (A-18J) Chicago, Illinois 60604-3507 Dear Ms. Newton: 

Through this letter, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) is 

supplementing the information conveyed to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on 

December 6, 2007, regarding state authorities necessary to implement the Clean Air Act's, 

Section 110 infrastructure requirements for current and prospective future National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards. 

Section 11 0(a)(2)(G) requires states to provide for authority to address activities causing imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, including contingency plans to implement the emergency episode provision in their State Implementation Plans. The Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended (Act 451), 

MCL R 324.5518 provides authority for the MDEQ to require immediate discontinuation of air 

contaminant discharges that constitute an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public 

health, safety, or welfare, or to the environment. This authority is not limited to any specific 

pollutants and certainly encompasses all size fractions of particulate matter. 

As indicated in the letter of December 6, 2007, the MDEQ will revise administrative rules to 

implement emergency action plans when the EPA establishes revised significant harm levels for 

PM2,5, if needed. In the interim, the MDEQ has adequate emergency episode authority. 

Additionally, the MDEQ participates in ongoing programs such as EnviroFlash and AirNow to 

alert the public about air quality, and provides current air quality status on the MDEQ web 

pages. If you have questions about this issue, please contact Ms. Mary Maupin, Air Quality Division, at 

5 1 7-373-7039. 

cc: Mr. John Summerhays, EPA 

Mr. Jim Sygo, Deputy Director, MDEQ 

Ms. Mary Maupin, MDEQ 

CONSTITUTION HALL 525 WEST ALLEGAN STREET* PO. BOX 30260 LANSING. MICHIGAN 48909-7760 

www.michigan.gov (51 7) 373-7023
No. 96-6054.

#### Palacios *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# C_2015236EN.01000501.xml

| 20.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 236/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 236/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 4 June 2015 — Stichting Corporate Europe Observatory v European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-399/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeals - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Access to the documents of the European institutions - Documents relating to the trade negotiations between the European Union and the Republic of India - Full access - Refusal))

(2015/C 236/06)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Stichting Corporate Europe Observatory (represented by: S. Crosby, Solicitor)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Clotuche-Duvieusart and I. Zervas, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and J. Möller, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2) | Orders Stichting Corporate Europe Observatory to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Stichting Corporate Europe Observatory to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 274, 21.9.2013.

1

---
No. 42150.

#### Protests 627854-G, etc., of Cellas, Inc., et al. (New York).

Opnion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 49302), Abstract 40880, and *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 49389) the protests were sustained.
<PAGE>












                                   EXHIBIT 23

                          CONSENT OF RADICS & CO., LLC










<PAGE>








                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



         We have issued our report dated February 15, 2002, accompanying the

consolidated financial statements of Liberty Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiaries

included in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31,

2001. We consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the

Registration Statement of Liberty Bancorp, Inc. on Form S-8, (File No.

333-95819, effective February 1, 2000).

                                                    /S/ Radics & Co., LLC

Pine Brook, New Jersey
March 28, 2002
November 25, 2014

Document Control Office (7407M) Office ofPollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20460-0001 

## RECEIVED OPPT CBIC

## lO\l;I~OV25 

## M\\1:58

Re: Proposed SignificantNew Use Rule for CertainNonylphenols and NonylphenolEthoxylates (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2007-0490)
Dear Sir or Madam: In the October 1, 2014 Federal Register, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a SignificantNewUse Rule (SNUR) for fifteen nonylphenols and nonylphenol ethoxylates. For thirteen ofthese substances, EPA proposed that the new use be defined as any use, since these compounds were notbelieved by EPA to be active in U.S. commerce. For the remaining two substances, EPA proposed that a newuse be defined as any use other than as an intermediate or an epoxy cure catalyst. EPA requested comments on other ongoing uses (as ofOctober 1, 2014) ofwhich it was not aware. 3M hereby submits infmmation on its ongoing uses ofsome ofthe substances subject to the proposed SNUR, and requests thatthese ongoing uses be reflected inthe final rule. 3M is not a domestic manufacturer ofany ofthe substances identified in the proposed SNUR, but 3M does import two ofthe proposed SNUR substances. Both substances were imported in quantities belowthe reporting threshold for the 2012 Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The table below summarizes 3M'srecent import activity and the ongoing uses ofthese two substances. CAS Number 2010 2011 2012 2013 Imports Imports Imports Imports 9016-45-9 Uses
Surfactant for sizing compounds used in abrasive product

3M has an ongoing reformulation effort to remove CAS# 9016-45-9 from its imported sizing solutions, but thatproject is not yet complete.Page2

In additionto importing the substances above, 3Mhas ongoing processing activities associatedwith the following substances: CASNumber Uses 9016-45-9 Surfactant used in polymer emulsions, industrial lubricants, pressure-sensitive adhesives, and spray foam polyurethane adhesives and insulation. Component ofpigment used in nonwoven article manufacturing Cure catalyst and viscosity reducer for industrial electrical products. 84852-15-3 Epoxy cure catalyst and viscosity reducer for automotive repair products, traffic sensor sealants, and industrial coatings
. Inthe proposed SNUR, EPA indicated that it does not believe CAS# 9016-45-9 and 25154-52-3 are actually in commercial distribution and that those compounds should instead be represented by other CAS numbers. 3Mhas relied upon the representations of its raw material suppliers inthe informationpresented above. Please contact me with any questions aboutthe information above. Sincerely,

Jonathan M. Gerber Regulatory Specialist 3MMedical Department, Toxicology Assessment and Compliance Assurance 3M Center, Building 220-6E-03 St. Paul, MN 55144-1000 Phone: 651-733-0226 Fax: 651-733-1773 Email:jmgerber1@mmm.com

2
April 27, 1960

Reap. Dec. 9695.

reappraisements R59/12528 and R59/12529.

#### Standard Sewing Equipment Corp. *v.*United States,

REHEARING MOTION DENIED

Motion by plaintiff.
### DAVID RALSTON 

### SPEAKER

April 27, 2015

The Honorable Anthony R
. Foxx Secretary of Transportation US Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Ave SE Washington, DC 20590 The Honorable John F
. Kerry Secretary of State US Department of State 2201 C Street NW Washington, DC 20520 Dear Secretaries Foxx and Kerry, 

# !J{ouse 

# of !l{epresentatives 332 STATE CAPITOL ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30334 (404) 656-5020 (404) 656-5644 (FAX)

Currently; the nations of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are subsidizing their airline carriers--Qatar Airways, Etihad Airways , and Emirates Airline--to an extent that has distorted the aviation marketplace
. Over the past decade, the Gulf carriers have received over $42 billion in subsidies and other unfair benefits from their governments, which enabled them to buy more airplanes and offer more routes at a lower cost compared to the U.S
. airlines, who are not receiving the same financial assistance. Not only do these actions jeopardize American businesses and jobs, but they disregard the rules set forth in the Open skies agreements between the U .S. and each of the Gulf States
. With recent reports stating that for every international roundtrip flight lost by a U.S. carrier we stand to lose**mo~e** than 800 jobs, I can't help but think of the deva s tating impact this would have on our s tate
. As the busiest airport in the world, Atlanta Hartsfield International has a direct economic impact of more than about $32.5 billion on the Atlanta metro area. In addition, Delta Air Lines employs more than 30,000 employees in Atlanta, and is the largest employer in our state. Essentially, if Hartsfield and Delta suffer as a result of the massive subsidies being distributed to the Gulf carriers by their governments, so too will the people and businesses in Georgia. We must protect Hartsfield, one of our state's greatest economic eng ines, which is why I am calling on you to open direct consultations with the governments of Qatar and the UAE and to place a freeze on any new routes until this issue is resolved. Thank you for your attention to this critical matter
.

Ralston, Speaker Georgia House of Repre sentatives 0 0 

## ·- •' I DR/dh


# s 10-150505-024o t- <,, .

## ¢~~:;;:+c. 1- • ,.... -"' .;**~;"·** .,. L< · .;.**~** & • ....**~** 177t> 

## Jlouse of !l(epresentatives .Jt.tfanta, (je orgia DAVID RALSTON

Speaker , District 7 332 State Capitol Atlanta, Geor gia 30334



## 510-150505-024 The Honorable Anthony 

## R. Foxx Secretary ofTransporta tion US Department ofTransportation 1200 New jersey Ave SE Washington, DC 20590

,,,I Ill

## lrl• I

### II I I 

### IJljl

### Jrl Ill

### I I 

### I

# ·II 1,IJI 

# I' '''"1'1'

## rl•r r l"'II

## Jl•
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0701

IN THE MATTER OF,

W.D.,

A Youth Under the Age of 18.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including August 16, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 10 2024

07/10/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0701
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2157 

To ensure that all of Brevard County, Florida, is treated as a HUBZone, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 6, 2012 

Mr. NELSON of Florida (for himself and Mr. RUBIO) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship 

A BILL 

To ensure that all of Brevard County, Florida, is treated 

as a HUBZone, 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 ‘‘Shuttle Workforce Re5 vitalization Act of 2012’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) The termination of the space shuttle pro9 gram has resulted in significant economic hardship 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2157 IS

1 for the region surrounding the Kennedy Space Cen2 ter. 

3 (2) The highly skilled space shuttle workforce 

4 in Brevard County, Florida, is a unique asset of the 

5 United States, the retention of which will facilitate 

6 advancements in science and technology. 

7 (3) The technical capabilities, dedication, and 

8 perseverance of the space shuttle workforce will en9 hance the technological competitiveness of the 

10 United States by cultivating and developing the 

11 small business community within Brevard County, 

12 Florida. 

13 (4) It is in the national interest to remain glob14 ally competitive in the fields of science and tech15 nology. 

16 SEC. 3. BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA. 

17 For purposes of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

18 631 et seq.), Brevard County, Florida, shall be a 

19 HUBZone, as defined in section 3(p) of the Small Busi20 ness Act (15 U.S.C. 632(p)), until not earlier than Janu21 ary 1, 2020. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
No. 40554.

#### Protest 952075-G of G. Hirsch’s Sons (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel embroidered ornaments, bandings, and insertings the same as those passed upon in *United States*v. *Smith*(12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 384, T. D. 40544), and embroidered-net ornaments similar to those the subject of *United States*v. *Ramig*(17 C. C. P. A. 365, T. D. 43809) were held dutiable at 75 percent under paragraph 1430. Merchandise in chief value of cellulose filaments the same as those passed upon in Abstract 37230 was held dutiable at 60 percent under paragraph 31 as claimed.
Linuron Human Health Risk Assessment DP No. D415741

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF

CHEMICAL SAFETY AND

POLLUTION PREVENTION

MEMORANDUM

Date: November 5, 2013

Subject: Addendum. Linuron. Section 3 Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed 

Use on Coriander, Dill, Horseradish, Parsley, Celeriac, Rhubarb, and Pea (Dry).

PC Code: 035506 DP Barcode: D415741

Decision No.: 469722 Registration No.: 61842-23

Petition No.: 2E8083 Regulatory Action: Section 3 Registration

Case No.: 0047 Risk Assessment Type: Single Chemical Aggregate

TXR No.: NA CAS No.: 330-55-2

MRID No.: NA 40 CFR: §180.184

From: Nancy Tsaur, Chemist

Risk Assessment Branch 3

Health Effects Division (7509P)

Through: Christine Olinger, Branch Chief

Risk Assessment Branch 3

Health Effects Division (7509P)

To: Laura Nollen, Risk Manager

Risk Integration Minor Use and Emergency Response Branch

Division (7505P)

This document provides a recommended revision to the tolerance expression for linuron. 
Linuron Human Health Risk Assessment DP No. D415741

According to HED’s Interim Guidance on Tolerance Expressions (S. Knizner, 05/27/2009), the 

tolerance expressions for linuron should be revised as follows:

Under 40 CFR §180.184(a) General:

“Tolerances are established for residues of the herbicide linuron [3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-

methoxy-1-methylurea], including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities 

in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined 

by measuring only those linuron residues convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of linuron, in or on the commodity.”

Under 40 CFR §180.184(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions:

“Time-limited tolerances are established for residues of the herbicide linuron [3-(3,4-

dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea], including its metabolites and degradates, in or on 

the commodities in the table below, resulting from use of the pesticide pursuant to FIFRA 

section 18 emergency exemptions. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is 

to be determined by measuring only those linuron residues convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline, 

calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of linuron, in or on the commodity. The tolerance 

expires and is revoked on the date specified in the table.

Under 40 CFR §180.184(c) Tolerances with regional registrations:

“Tolerances with regional registrations, as defined in §180.1(l), are established for residues 

of the herbicide linuron [3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea], including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with 

the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only those linuron

residues convertible to 3,4-dichloroaniline, calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

linuron, in or on the commodity.”
No. 55607.

#### The Fan Co. *v.*United States,

protests 169311-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

At the hearing it was stipulated that the circumstances relating to the liquidator’s conversion of the currency are similar in all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. The collector’s letter of transmittal, which was received in evidence, conceded that the conversion of the currency should have been made in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675. In view of the stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the cur*444rency of the invoices should have been converted in the manner directed by the judgment of this court in said Abstract- 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
. ... 1 1

; .. ~ - . . ~ : ( ,

() • n ' J

t , ,'. L 

### Qy E · M A I L F e bruary 27 , 20 14 M i chael M a rt i n EAS Prog ram U.S
. Department of Tran s p o rtati o n 1 2 00 N e w Jerse y Ave nue, SE Washi ng ton, DC 20 59 0 R e: E A S at P resqu e Isle , Ma ine, a n d Pl att sb urgh, N e w Yo rk Do c kets DO T-O ST - 200 0 - 8 012 a nd 200 3-1 4783 D ea r Mr
. Marti n: Pen in sula A i rways, In c. ( " P en Air "), the curren t E AS car rie r on these two rout e s, is working dilig en t l y to evalu at e a nd pre pare a service proposa l in re sponse to DOT Order 2014-1-21. The cu rrent d u e d at e for su ch pro pos a ls is Marc h 4, 2014. Pe nA i r res pectfully requests a one-week e xt ens io n , unt il Marc h 11, 20 14, fo r sub m i ttin g it s EA S pro p os a l for t h ese markets. W e appreciate yo ur ex pe d i ted cons id erati o n of t h i s requ e st .

'< , 

# - ~ - \~c

. 

# ---- --- - f S cott Bloomquist Pre side n t, PenAi r

• 6j 

# oo B Qe ing Aven ue • An ch o rag e, Al aska 99502 · (9 0 7 ) 2 43 -248 5 • F ax 2 43- 6 848 • www.p e nair.com Pen in sula A i rways, I n c. D/ B/A P £ N AIR
(Reap. Dec. 9136)

#### United States *v.*Patrick & Graves

Entry No. 72-C.

(Decided April 24, 1958)

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

Defendant not represented by counsel.

Johnson, Judge:

Th e merchandise involved in this appeal consists of concrete reinforcement bars imported from France and entered at the port of Corpus Christi.

This case has been submitted on a stipulation reading as follows:

It is hereby stipulated, consented, and agreed by and between the attorney for the plaintiff and the defendant that (1) The merchandise involved herein was properly dutiable on the basis of export value as defined in Sec. 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930.

> (2) The foreign value, as defined in Sec. 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, for the involved merchandise was either lower, or non existant [sic].

> (3) The export value for the involved merchandise is as follows: $115 per metric ton, plus $1.00 per metric ton for grade, plus $3.00 per metric ton for size, less inland charges of $7.42 per metric ton.

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 value was $116 per metric ton, plus $1 per metric ton for grade, plus $3 per metric ton for size, less inland charges of $7.42 per metric ton.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.