alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| Invalid Request.

We're sorry, but the URL or date specified were invalid.Please try another request.Keep in mind, there is no text search.  Enter a web address into the search box above.See the FAQs for more info and help, or contact us. |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

Home |                                                Help

Copyright © 2001,                                                Internet Archive |                                                Terms of Use |                                                Privacy Policy
S. 172

One Hundred Ninth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the fourth day of January, two thousand and five

An Act

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to provide for the regulation

of all contact lenses as medical devices, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REGULATION OF CERTAIN ARTICLES AS MEDICAL

DEVICES.

Section 520 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21

U.S.C. 360j) is amended by adding at the end the following subsection:

‘‘Regulation of Contact Lens as Devices

‘‘(n)(1) All contact lenses shall be deemed to be devices under

section 201(h).

‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) shall not be construed as bearing on or

being relevant to the question of whether any product other than

a contact lens is a device as defined by section 201(h) or a drug

as defined by section 201(g).’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Exhibit 32.2

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Global Earth Energy, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending May 31, 2011, I, Edmund J. Gorman, Chief Financial Officer of Global Earth Energy, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1.

Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending May 31, 2011, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending May 31, 2011, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Global Earth Energy, Inc.

Dated: July 20, 2011.

/s/ Edmund J. Gorman

Edmund J. Gorman, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of

Global Earth Energy, Inc.
#### Julian O. RUSSELL v. RALSTON PURINA CO.

No. 45746.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

April 20, 1970.

Samuel H. Wilkins, Jackson, for appellant.

Mitchell M. Lundy, Grenada, for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 20 (Thursday, January 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4549-4550]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2296]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[UT-912-07-0777-52]


Notice of Meeting of the Utah Resource Advisory Council (RAC)

SUMMARY: Utah's Resource Advisory Council will be conducting a 2-day 
meeting in Escalante, Utah. A field tour of the Escalante section of 
the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument will be taking place on 
March 18, 1997. This will be an all-day tour on which we will be 
discussing issues (i.e. recreation, grazing, archaeology, etc.), 
pertaining to the Monument. The Council will depart from Escalante for 
the Monument at 8:00 a.m. RAC meetings are open to the public; however, 
transportation, meals, and overnight accommodations are the 
responsibility of the participating public.
    Our general meeting of the RAC will take place on March 19, 1997, 
at the Bureau of Land Management's Escalante Field Office, 755 West 
Main, Escalante, Utah. At this time, we will be discussing membership 
and nomination procedures, charter renewal, and an overview of selected 
issues and opportunities. Opportunities for members of the public to 
address the Council will take place March 19, 1996, from 8:00 a.m.-8:30 
a.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public interested in 
attending the Monument field tour or desiring an opportunity to address 
the Council should contact Sherry Foot, Special Programs Coordinator, 
Bureau of Land Management, 324 South State Street, Salt lake City, 
Utah, 84111; phone (801) 539-4195, by March 10, 1997.


[[Page 4550]]


    Dated: January 22, 1997.
G. William Lamb,
Utah BLM State Director.
[FR Doc. 97-2296 Filed 1-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

MATTHEW ADAM SUPNICK, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

MELISSA ANN SUPNICK, 

Respondent. 

No. 85212 

F

NOV 2 8 ZO21-

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

This is an appeal frorn an order denying a motion to modify 

child custody. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Clark 

County; Stacy Michelle Rocheleau, Judge. 

This court's initial review indicated a potential jurisdictional 

defect. Specifically, the notice of appeal appears to have been prematurely 

filed because it was filed after the timely filing of a tolling motion and before 

the motion has been formally resolved. A timely tolling motion terminates 

the 30-day appeal period, and a notice of appeal is of no effect if it is filed 

after such a motion is filed but before the district court enters a written 

order finally resolving the motion. See NRAP 4(a)(6). Accordingly, this 

court entered an order directing appellant to show cause why this appeal 

should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 

In response to the order to show cause, appellant admits that 

he filed a timely tolling motion for reconsideration and to alter or amend 

the judgment. Appellant contends that the district court's October 31, 2022, 

minute order denying the tolling motion gives this court jurisdiction over 

this appeal. "[D]ispositional court orders that are not administrative in 

nature, but deal with the procedural posture or merits of the underlying 

controversy, must be written, signed, and filed before they become 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

101 I947A 
J. 

, Sr. J. 

effective." State, Diu. of Child & Family Servs. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. 

Court, 120 Nev. 445, 454, 92 P.3d 1239, 1245 (2004); see also Rust v. Clark 

Cty. Sch. Dist., 103 Nev. 686, 689, 747 P.2d 1380, 1382 (1987) (stating that 

the clerk's minute order is ineffective). Accordingly, it appears the tolling 

motion is still pending. A premature notice of appeal does not divest the 

district court of jurisdiction; this court lacks jurisdiction, and 

ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED) 

Cegif\, J. 

Cadish 

cc: Hon. Stacy Michelle Rocheleau, District Judge, Family Court Division 

Jones & LoBello 

Kainen Law Group 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

'The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in this 

matter under a general order of assignment. 

2 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A
Exhibit 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                   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 Trenwick Group Ltd. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, W.
Marston Becker, Acting Chairman and Acting Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18, U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge:

      (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.

/s/ W. Marston Becker

W. Marston Becker
Acting Chairman and
Acting Chief Executive Officer
November 14, 2002
1 

### Kelly, Shaheerah

From: Ross Bell <rebell@co.shasta.ca.us> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 9:32 AM To: hswriter@frontiernet.net; Christenson, Kara; Jordan, Deborah; Kelly, Shaheerah Subject: RE: EPA Region 9 mentions in their Pu blic Notice a permit issued in 1994.... Attachments: SPI 94-PO-18 (orig PSD).pdf

Heidi Strand, Here is a copy of the permit you requested.

Ross Bell Air Quality District Manager Shasta County Air Quality Management District 1855 Placer Street Redding, CA 96001

From: hswriter@frontiernet.net [mailto:hswriter@frontiernet.net] Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 3:41 PM To: Ross Bell; Kara Christenson; jordan.Deborah@epa.gov; Shaheerah Kelly Subject: EPA Region 9 mentions in their Public Notice a permit issued in 1994....



## Dear Kara Christenson (Region 9) and Ross Bell (SCAQMD)

Region 9 published a public notice regarding permit application No. SAC 12-01 on November 22, 2013. In this public notice it states(page 1):

The original PSD Permit for this facili ty was issued on 1994 by the Shasta County Air Quality District (SCAQMD).

I would appreciate EPA Region 9 and the SCAQMD emailing me a copy of the permit Region 9 is referring to **ASAP** . (Mail would be fine if the permit is not available on line.)

Thank you so much,

Heidi Strand (530)472-1355 P.O. Box 172 Whitmore, CA 96096
STATE OF TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37243-0435 JAMES H. FYKE PHIL BREDESEN

COMMISSIONER GOVERNOR December 28; 2009
Mr. A. StanleyMeiburg Acting RegionalAdministrator U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia30303-3104 RE: SmokeyMountain Smelters NPL Listing DearMr. Meiburg: I appreciate the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) consideration ofthe State ofTennessee's position onthe potential for listing Smokey Mountain Smelters to the National PriorityList (NPL). We understand that USEP A Superfund will use a removal action followed by remedial action to address this site and the approachwill include:

• Removal action to address the aluminum dross and other contamination within the dilapidated and collapsing mainprocess building. • Remedial actionto address aluminum salt cake and other contaminationremaining after theUSEPAremoval action. • Evaluating the site to determine whether contamination from former agricultural chemical manufacturing may pose an unaccepfable threat and, if it does, to require potentialresponsible parties to address that contamination. The State ofTennessee concurs withplacing this site onthe NPLto implementthis approach. This concurrence letter does not obligate the State ofTennessee to provide any matching funds to the remedial action. Further, it is Tennessee's preference that the remedial actions not result in a future high cost operation and maintenance obligation for the State. Any obligation for matching funds or operation and maintenance would be effectuated in a fhture Superfund State Contract.1
Mr. A. Stanley Meiburg December 28, 2009 Page 2



### If you have questions, please contact Mr. Andy Binford, Director of TDEC's Division of Remediation, at (615) 532-0911 or Andy.Binford@tn.gov.

Deputy Commissioner PLS:AB:cm Cc: Franklin Hill, EPA JohnNolen, EPA Chuck Head, IDEC Andy Binford, TDEC
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 165 (Tuesday, August 26, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45155-45156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22505]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 97-ASW-06]


Revision of Class E Airspace; Ponca City, OK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This action confirms the effective date of a direct final rule 
which revises the Class E surface airspace at Ponca City, OK. 
Communication capability and weather observations exist continuously 
for terminal instrument operations at Ponca City Municipal Airport. 
Therefore, Class E surface airspace should be continuous rather than 
designated as part-time Class E surface airspace. The direct final rule 
is intended to revise Class E surface airspace to provide controlled 
airspace for continuous terminal instrument operations at Ponca City 
Municipal Airport, Ponca City, OK.


[[Page 45156]]


EFFECTIVE DATE: The direct final rule published at 62 FR 28331 is 
effective 0901 UTC, September 11, 1997 .

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donald J. Day, Airspace Branch, Air Traffic Division, Southwest Region, 
Federal Aviation Administration, Fort Worth, TX 76193-0520, telephone: 
(817) 222-5593.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published this direct final rule 
with a request for comments in the Federal Register on May 23, 1997 (62 
FR 28331). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a 
non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no 
adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that 
no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse 
comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse 
comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would 
become effective on September 11, 1997. No adverse comments were 
received, and thus this action confirms that the direct final rule will 
be effective on that date.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on August 5, 1997.
Albert L. Viselli,
Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Southwest Region.
[FR Doc. 97-22505 Filed 8-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
# L_2023220DE.01002501.xml

| 7.9.2023 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 220/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.9.2023

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 220/25

---

Berichtigung der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2023/1511 der Kommission vom 20. Juli 2023 zur Änderung der Durchführungsverordnungen (EU) 2018/2019 und (EU) 2020/1213 hinsichtlich bestimmter zum Anpflanzen bestimmter Pflanzen der Art Malus sylvestris mit Ursprung im Vereinigten Königreich

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 184 vom 21. Juli 2023
  )

Seite 29, Anhang II zur Einfügung eines neuen Eintrags im Anhang der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2020/1213, Tabelle Spalte 4 Buchstabe a Ziffer iv:

Anstatt:

| „iv) | unmittelbar vor der Ausfuhr Sendungen der Pflanzen einer amtlichen Kontrolle auf Colletotrichum aenigma, Eulecanium excrescens und Takahashia japonica unterzogen wurden und die Probengröße mindestens eine Nachweisgrenze von 1 % Befall mit einer Zuverlässigkeit von 99 % gewährleistet; sowie einer amtlichen Kontrolle auf das Vorhandensein von Colletotrichum aenigma, einschließlich stichprobenartiger Beprobungen und Untersuchungen der Pflanzen, unterzogen wurden.“ |
| --- | --- |

„iv)

unmittelbar vor der Ausfuhr Sendungen der Pflanzen einer amtlichen Kontrolle auf Colletotrichum aenigma, Eulecanium excrescens und Takahashia japonica unterzogen wurden und die Probengröße mindestens eine Nachweisgrenze von 1 % Befall mit einer Zuverlässigkeit von 99 % gewährleistet; sowie einer amtlichen Kontrolle auf das Vorhandensein von Colletotrichum aenigma, einschließlich stichprobenartiger Beprobungen und Untersuchungen der Pflanzen, unterzogen wurden.“

Colletotrichum aenigma, Eulecanium excrescens

Takahashia japonica

Colletotrichum aenigma

muss es heißen:

| „iv) | unmittelbar vor der Ausfuhr Sendungen der Pflanzen einer amtlichen Kontrolle auf Eulecanium excrescens und Takahashia japonica unterzogen wurden und die Probengröße mindestens eine Nachweisgrenze von 1 % Befall mit einer Zuverlässigkeit von 99 % gewährleistet; sowie einer amtlichen Kontrolle auf das Vorhandensein von Colletotrichum aenigma, einschließlich stichprobenartiger Beprobungen und Untersuchungen der Pflanzen, unterzogen wurden.“ |
| --- | --- |

„iv)

unmittelbar vor der Ausfuhr Sendungen der Pflanzen einer amtlichen Kontrolle auf Eulecanium excrescens und Takahashia japonica unterzogen wurden und die Probengröße mindestens eine Nachweisgrenze von 1 % Befall mit einer Zuverlässigkeit von 99 % gewährleistet; sowie einer amtlichen Kontrolle auf das Vorhandensein von Colletotrichum aenigma, einschließlich stichprobenartiger Beprobungen und Untersuchungen der Pflanzen, unterzogen wurden.“

Eulecanium excrescens

Takahashia japonica

Colletotrichum aenigma

---
#### Raymond WOOLIE et ux. v. CITY OF BATON ROUGE.

No. 11452.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

July 11, 1977.

*748Stan E. Branton, St. Francisville, of counsel, for plaintiffs-appellees, Raymond Woolie, et ux.

Joseph F. Keogh, Parish Atty., Samuel R. Cicero, Asst. Parish Atty., Baton Rouge, of counsel for defendant-appellant, City of Baton Rouge.

William T. Kivett, Baton Rouge, of counsel for intervenor, Maryland Gas. Co.

Before ELLIS, CHIASSON and PONDER, JJ.

ELLIS, Judge.

This is a suit by Raymond Woolie and his wife, Karen B. Woolie, for damages arising out of an automobile accident in which Mrs. Woolie was injured. Defendant is the City of Baton Rouge, Maryland Casualty Company, plaintiffs' collision insurer, intervened for the amount paid plaintiffs for the loss of their automobile. After trial on the merits, judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiffs and intervenor, and the City has appealed.

Mrs, Woolie was driving home on Florida Street in Baton Rouge, following another motor vehicle. The lead car suddenly pulled from the inside or left lane of traffic into the right hand lane, and Mrs. Woolie found herself confronted by a large hole, guarded by a barricade, completely blocking the lane. She applied her brakes, but was unable to stop before driving through the barricade and into the hole. Her testimony as to the absence of other warning devices or barricades was confirmed by the only eyewitness.

Witnesses for the City testified that the , hole had been dug about two hours before the accident, and that five barricades, three smudge pots and a sign warning that the lane was closed 500 feet ahead and been put out.

The trial judge made the following findings, after reviewing the facts:

> “The testimony given by the witnesses Robinson and Wilkinson clearly demonstrate that this construction area was inadequately posted. The warning sign alleged to have been 500 feet back from the site was obviously much closer to the site but just how close remains in doubt. Neither Robinson nor Wilkinson saw smudge pots on the scene. The only barricades seen by Robinson and Wilkinson prior to the hole itself was the one located approximately 75 to 100 feet away from the hole. Considering that Florida Boulevard is a heavily traveled, multi-lane road with a speed limit of 50 miles per hour at this site, defendant breached its duty to adequately warn oncoming traffic of the construction site ahead and the breach of this duty has caused damage to plaintiff and her husband."

The only issues presented by the City of Baton Rouge are factual in nature, involving credibility of the witnesses, These questions were resolved adversely to defendant by the trial judge, and there is ample evidence to support his conclusions, We find no manifest error therein.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed, with defendant to pay all costs for which it may be legally liable.

AFFIRMED.
#### Thomas WILLIAMS, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-640.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Nov. 4, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 30, 1969.

Appeal from Court of Record, Broward County; Russell Seay, Jr., Judge.

Appeal quashed.
#### Rocco Anthony CONTI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 76-585 and 76-1436.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 7, 1978.

Rehearing Denied April 4, 1978.

Emmett A. Moran, Winter Park, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard P. Zaretsky and Glenn H. Mitchell, Asst. Attys. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the evidence and find, as a matter of law, that it is insufficient to convict the appellant. The judgment and sentence are reversed.

REVERSED.

DOWNEY ■ and DAUKSCH, JJ., and BURNSTEIN, MIETTE K., Associate Judge, concur.
Exhibit 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

   Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)


         The  undersigned   executive   officer  of  WVS  Financial  Corp.  (the
"Registrant")  hereby certifies that the  Registrant's  Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q  for the  three  months  ended  March  31,  2008  fully  complies  with the
requirements  of Section 13(a) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that
the information contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.




                                                   /s/ David J. Bursic
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                   David J. Bursic
                                                   President and
                                                   Chief Executive Officer


Date:  May 9, 2008


Note: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been provided to WVS Financial Corp. and will be retained
by WVS Financial  Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission
or its staff upon request.


                                      E-3