alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCharacterization of silicon-gate CMOS/SOS integrated circuits processed with ion implantationThe procedure used to generate MEBES masks and produce test wafers from the 10X Mann 1600 Pattern Generator Tape using existing CAD utility programs and the MEBES machine in the RCA Solid State Technology Center are described. The test vehicle used is the MSFC-designed SC102 Solar House Timing Circuit. When transforming the Mann 1600 tapes into MEBES tapes, extreme care is required in order to obtain accurate minimum linewidths when working with two different coding systems because the minimum grid sizes may be different for the two systems. The minimum grid sizes are 0.025 mil for MSFC Mann 1600 and 0.02 mil for MEBES. Some snapping to the next grid is therefore inevitable, and the results of this snapping effect are significant when submicron lines are present. However, no problem was noticed in the SC102 circuit because its minimum linewidth is 0.3 mil (7.6 microns). MEBES masks were fabricated and wafers were processed using the silicon-gate CMOS/SOS and aluminum-gate COS/MOS processing.Document ID19840021018Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsWoo, D. S.*(RCA Solid State Technology Center Somerville, NJ, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1982Subject CategoryElectronics And Electrical EngineeringReport/Patent NumberRCA-PRRL-81-CR-19NASA-CR-161988NAS 1.26:161988Accession Number84N29087Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-31986Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19840021018.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2023035EN.01002901.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 7.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 35/29 |

---

Corrigendum to UN Regulation No 154 – Uniform provisions concerning the approval of light duty passenger and commercial vehicles with regards to criteria emissions, emissions of carbon dioxide and fuel consumption and/or the measurement of electric energy consumption and electric range (WLTP) [2022/2124]

(
[Official Journal of the European Union L 290 of 10 November 2022](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2022_290_R_TOC)
)

On page 67, Appendix 2, point 3.3.1 is replaced as follows:

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| ‘3.3.1. | Evaluation of CO2 emissions and electric energy consumption For Level 1A only: For each total number of tests, one of the three following decisions can be reached, where the factor A shall be set at 1.01: | | | | --- | --- | | (i) | Pass the family if Formula | | | | | --- | --- | | (ii) | Fail the family if Formula | | | | | --- | --- | | (iii) | Take another measurement if: | Formula where: parameters tP1,i, tP2,i, tF1,i, and tF2 are taken from the Table A2/3. Table A2/3 Pass/fail decision criteria for the sample size | | | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | PASS | | FAIL | | | Tests (i) | tP1,i | tP2,i | tF1,i | tF2 | | 3 | 1.686 | 0.438 | 1.686 | 0.438 | | 4 | 1.125 | 0.425 | 1.177 | 0.438 | | 5 | 0.850 | 0.401 | 0.953 | 0.438 | | 6 | 0.673 | 0.370 | 0.823 | 0.438 | | 7 | 0.544 | 0.335 | 0.734 | 0.438 | | 8 | 0.443 | 0.299 | 0.670 | 0.438 | | 9 | 0.361 | 0.263 | 0.620 | 0.438 | | 10 | 0.292 | 0.226 | 0.580 | 0.438 | | 11 | 0.232 | 0.190 | 0.546 | 0.438 | | 12 | 0.178 | 0.153 | 0.518 | 0.438 | | 13 | 0.129 | 0.116 | 0.494 | 0.438 | | 14 | 0.083 | 0.078 | 0.473 | 0.438 | | 15 | 0.040 | 0.038 | 0.455 | 0.438 | | 16 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.438 | 0.438’ | |

---
#### VENETIAN GULF SERVICE STATION v. HATHCOCK.

No. 38846.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

CHARLES ALAN CARVER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 2D2024-1096

July 3, 2024

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for 

Pinellas County; Keith Meyer, Judge.

Charles Alan Carver, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, LaROSE, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
Exhibit 32.1    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 Innocom Technology Holdings, Inc. a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Hui Yan Sui, William, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my knowledge:  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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/ Hui Yan Sui, William Hui Yan Sui, William Chief Executive Officer Date: November 12, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 170 (Wednesday, September 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 46491]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23278]



[[Page 46491]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP91-2778-002]


Valero Transmission, L.P.; Notice of Filing

August 27, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 21, 1997, Valero Transmission, L.P. 
(Valero) located at P.O. Box 400, San Antonio, TX 78292, filed in 
Docket No. CP91-2778-002, a notice concerning a change in its corporate 
name, all as more fully set forth in the notice which is on file with 
the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Valero states that its corporate name was changed to PG&E Texas 
Pipeline, L.P. (PG&E Texas), effective August 8, 1997. Valero requests 
the Commission to modify its records in this docket to reflect Valero's 
new name, specifically the Presidential Permit and Section 3 of the 
Natural Gas Act import and export authorization previously issued to 
Valero (57 FERC para. 61,299 and 68 FERC para. 61,191). Valero further 
states that the name change to PG&E Texas is a change in name only and 
does not reflect any substantive change of ownership, corporate 
structure, organization or operations.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with 
reference to said notice should on or before September 17, 1997 file 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20426, 
a motion to intervene or a protest in accordance with the requirements 
of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 
385.211) and the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). 
All protests filed with the Commission will be considered by it in 
determining the appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to 
make the protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party to a proceeding or to participate as a party in any 
hearing therein must file a motion to intervene in accordance with the 
Commission's Rules.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23278 Filed 9-2-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
### Compilation of records of surface waters of the United States, October 1950 to September 1960: Part 10. The Great Basin

By: E. L. HendricksWalter HofmannK. N. PhillipsW. I. TravisM. T. WilsonE. E. HarrisW.N. Jibson

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1734

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### James S. CHATMAN v. STATE.

No. 38961.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 225 So.2d 576.
ATTACHMENT H: Worksheets Used to Calculate EPA and Federal 

Government Labor Costs

NAICS: 999100

EPA or Federal Government

Labor Category: Formula Managerial Technical Clerical

Unloaded Hourly Rate1 = W $56.54 $37.15 $21.15 

Benefits Percentage2 Lb = B/W 46.3% 46.3% 46.3%

Benefits per hour B = W*Lb $26.19 $17.21 $9.80 

Loaded Hourly Rate Wb = W + B = 

W(1+Lb)

$82.73 $54.36 $30.95 

Overhead Percentage3 Lo = OH/Wb 50% 50% 50%

Overhead per hour OH = Wb*Lo $41.36 $27.18 $15.47 

Fully Loaded Hourly 

Rate

Wf = Wb + OH

= W + B + OH

$124.09 $81.53 $46.42 

1. Data Source: BLS http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999100.htm May 2014 data

 NAICS 999100 - Federal Executive Branch 

 Standard Occupational Codes:

 Management: 11-0000, Management Occupations

 Technical: 

19-0000, Life, Physical, and Social Science 

Occupations

updated 

4/08/2014

 Clerical: 43-0000, Office and Administrative Support Occupations

2. Fringe benefits/wage per hour. The average for non farm, non federal civilian workers.

3. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual, Sixth Edition, 

EPA-452-02-001, January 2002, pg. 2-34. The loading for indirect costs is within the range of 20-70% 

of the load labor rate (wage + benefits) suggested in EPA guidance.
#### CITY NATIONAL BANK OF DOTHAN, a National Banking Association v. June T. BRICE.

Civ. 917.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

Sept. 7, 1977.

On Remand from Supreme Court.

HOLMES, Judge.

The prior opinion of this court has been reversed and remanded by the Supreme *334Court. On remand to this court, and in compliance with the Supreme Court’s opinion of June 3, 1977, 350 So.2d 333, this cause is reversed and remanded.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

WRIGHT, P. J., and BRADLEY, J., concur.
From: Schimmel, Terry (Bricks

‐ Phenix City) < Terry.Schimmel@boral.com >

Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 12:27 PM

To: Telander, Jeff

Subject: Re: Question regarding CBI status of SSMP Plans

Jeff,

Good to hear from you and sorry for the slow reply. Per your request below Boral does not consider the

referenced documents as CBI material.

Thanks,

Terry

"Telander, Jeff" < Telander.Jeff@epa.gov > wrote:

Hi Terry,

I hope you are doing well.

The plans you submitted on 2

‐ 28

‐ 2011 for Boral’s Bessemer, Salisbury, and Muskogee plants include the

following disclaimer:

“This document is considered company confidential and shall not be copied or carried outside of Boral

without management approval.”

I would appreciate it if you would please confirm that Boral does not consider those documents to be

confidential.

Thanks,

Jeff Telander

Overnight mail address:

US EPA

Mail Code D243

‐ 02

109 TW Alexander Drive

RTP, NC 27709
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 181 (Thursday, September 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 49001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24788]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. TM98-2-34-001]


Florida Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

September 12, 1997.
    Take notice that on September 9, 1997, Florida Gas Transmission 
Company (FGT) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets to 
become effective October 1, 1997:

Substutute Twenty-Third Revised Sheet No. 8A
Substitute Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 8A.01
Substitute Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 8A.02
Substitute Twenty-First Revised Sheet No. 8B
Substitute Fourteenth Revised Sheet No. 8B.01

    FGT states that on August 25, 1997, in Docket No. TM98-2-34-000 
(August 25 Filing), FGT filed tariff sheets pursuant to Section 27 of 
the General Terms and Conditions of FGT's Tariff to establish a Fuel 
Reimbursement Charge Percentage of 3.05% and a Unit Fuel Surcharge of 
(0.19 cents) per MMBtu. Prior to the August 25 Filing FGT had filed 
tariff sheets in Docket No. TM98-1-34-000 to adjust its ACA charge from 
0.19 cents to 0.21 cents PER MMBtu for Fiscal Year 1997, and the 
0.21 cents ACA charge was reflected in the August 25 Filing. 
Subsequently, the FERC notified pipelines, including FGT, that the 
correct ACA charge should be 0.22 cents per MMBtu. In the instant 
filing, FGT is reflecting the corrected ACA charge of 0.22 cents as 
shown in Docket No. TM98-2-34-001 being filed concurrently herewith. 
FGT states the instant filing is being made to reflect the corrected 
ACA charge.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, 
Washington, DC 20426 in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's rules and regulations. All such protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-24788 Filed 9-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Emily BLOCH, Appellant, v. Nick ANTHONY, Trustee of Estate of Max L. Bloch, Appellee.

No. 69-411.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

June 11, 1969.

Rehearing Denied July 31, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 11;  Statement re: computation of per share earnings

Earnings per common and common equivalent share is calculated as follows:

                                                 	November 30
                                             	  1996	     1995

Earnings per common and common equivalent shares:

Net income	                                  $  776,577	  $ 1,145,792

Weighted average number of shares outstanding	 3,805,528	   2,952,568

Net effect of dilutive common stock options and 
common stock warrants based on the treasury 
stock method using the period average market 
price of the Company's common stock	              11,602	      24,704

Weighted average number of shares and equivalent 
shares	                                        3,817,130	    2,977,272

Earnings per common and common equivalent shares	 $ . 20  	  $   . 38  


Earnings per common share, assuming full dilution:

Net income	                                   $   776,577	 $ 1,145,792

Weighted average number of shares outstanding	  3,805,528	   2,952,568

Net effect of dilutive stock options based on the treasury
stock method using the end of period market price of
common, if higher than average	                    11,602	       24,704

Common stock and common stock equivalents	      3,817,130	    2,977,272

Earnings per common and common equivalent share	 $   . 20  	$      . 38
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 22 (Monday, February 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 4987]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2491]


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


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Public Information Collection Requirement Submitted to the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) for Review

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Title and OMB Control Number: Defense Reutilization & Marketing 
Service Business Reply Card.
    Type of Request: New collection.
    Number of Respondents: 800.
    Responses per Respondent: One.
    Annual Responses: 800.
    Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 200.
    Needs and Uses: Purpose of survey is to assess the service 
customers receive from the Defense Logistics Agency, Defense 
Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO). Assessed services may 
include turning in property, supplying property, selling property, or 
disposing of hazardous property. A customer comment card will be placed 
at the DRMO where the actual disposal mission occurs.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households; Business or other for 
profit; Not for profit; State, local, or tribal government.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Edward C. Springer.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Mr. Springer at the Office of Management 
and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. William Pearce.
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Mr. Pearce, WHS/DIOR, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302.

    Dated: January 28, 1997.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-2491 Filed 1-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 172 (Friday, September 5, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46877]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23646]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[TD 8656]
RIN 1545-AS24


Section 6662--Imposition of the Accuracy-Related Penalty; 
Correction

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Correcting amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to final regulations (TD 
8656) in the Code of Federal Regulations, which were published in the 
Federal Register on Friday, February 9, 1996 (61 FR 4876). The final 
regulations provide guidance on the imposition of the accuracy related 
penalty.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 9, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa G. Sams (202) 622-3880 (not a 
toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The final regulations that are the subject of these corrections are 
under section 6662 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Need for Correction

    As published, TD 8656 contains an error that may prove to be 
misleading and is in need of clarification.

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is corrected by making the following 
correcting amendment:

PART 1--INCOME TAXES

    Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in 
part as follows:

    Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *


Sec. 1.6662-6  [Corrected]

    Par. 2. In Sec. 1.6662-6, paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(E) is amended by 
removing the language ``Sec. 1.482-1(e)(2)(ii)(B)'' from the last 
sentence and adding the language ``Sec. 1.482-1(e)(2)(iii)(B)'' in its 
place.
Cynthia E. Grigsby,
Chief, Regulations Unit, Assistant Chief Counsel (Corporate).
[FR Doc. 97-23646 Filed 9-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-U
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Richard Lee LIGGETT.

No. 61788.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 27, 1978.

In re: Richard Lee Liggett applying for writs of review and habeas corpus. Parish of Tangipahoa.

Treating appeal as a writ, writ is denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAMES BARROW; GEORGE A TACKER,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

v.

NEWREZ LLC, DBA Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing; MORTGAGE LAW FIRM PC, an Arizona Corporation; DITECH FINANCIAL LLC, a foreign Limited Liability Company;
NEW RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE LLC,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 21

- 15626

D.C. No. 3:20

- cv

- 08064

- SM B

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona Susan M. Brnovich, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2022 * *

Before: McKEOWN, CHRISTEN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

James Barrow and George A. Tacker appeal pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims arising out

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

APR 21 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 21

- 15626

of foreclosure proceedings . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

review de novo a dism issal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Cervantes v. United States , 330 F.3d 1186, 1187 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ action because all of

plaintiffs’ claims rely on the untimeliness of defendant’s foreclosure proceedings,

but the record shows the foreclosure was timely under Arizona law

. See A riz

. R ev

.

S tat . § 12

- 548 (a contract in writing that is executed in Arizona has a statute of

limitations of six years); In re Smith , 101 P.3d 637, 639 (Ariz. 2004) (“Under

Arizona law, enforcement is stayed and the time in which to enforce the judgment

is tolled during the pendency of bankruptcy actions.”).

We do not consider matters not specific ally and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief or allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett

v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.