alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 191 (Thursday, October 2, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51606]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-25879]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 258

[F-97-FLXF-FFFFF; FRL-5900-7]
RIN 2050-AE24


Revisions to Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: On July 29, 1997, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) published a direct final rule (62 FR 40708) which established 
regulations to implement the Land Disposal Program Flexibility Act of 
1996 (LDPFA). These regulations provide additional flexibility to 
Approved States for any municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) that 
receives 20 tons or less of municipal solid waste per day. The 
additional flexibility applies to alternative frequencies of daily 
cover, frequencies of methane monitoring, and infiltration layers for 
final cover. As stated in the preamble to the direct final rule, 
provisions contained in the Revised Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste 
Landfills (56 FR 51104; October 9, 1991 and 61 FR 60327; November 27, 
1996) provide the additional flexibility for demonstrating financial 
assurance contemplated by Congress in the LDPFA. The additional 
flexibility will allow the owners and operators of small MSWLFs the 
opportunity to reduce their costs of MSWLF operation while still 
protecting human health and the environment. The EPA has not received 
an adverse comment objecting to this rule as written. Therefore, this 
rule will go into effect as scheduled.

DATES: The effective date of the direct final rule published at 62 FR 
40708 remains October 27, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the 
RCRA Hotline at 800 424-9346 or TDD 800 553-7672 (hearing impaired). In 
the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, call 703 412-9810 or TDD 703 
412-3323.
    For more detailed information on specific aspects of this 
rulemaking, contact Mr. Allen J. Geswein, U. S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste (5306W), 401 M Street, SW, 
Washington, D.C. 20460, 703 308-7261, [<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#096e6c7a7e6c6067276865656c67496c796864686065276c7968276e667f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7b1c1e080c1e1215551a17171e153b1e0b1a161a1217551e0b1a551c140d">[email protected]</span></a>].
Elizabeth A. Cotsworth,
Acting Director, Office of Solid Waste.
[FR Doc. 97-25879 Filed 10-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

No. 20-50749 Summary Calendar

United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee ,

versus Eleno Guillen-Morales, Defendant—Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:20-CR-217-1

Before Higginbotham, Jones, and Costa, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: * Eleno Guillen-Morales pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after removal, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He was sentenced to a 37-month term of imprisonment, to be followed by a three-year term of supervised release.

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 16, 2021 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-50749 Document: 00515824273 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2021No. 20-50749

2 Raising one issue on appeal, Gu illen-Morales argues that the recidivism enhancement under § 1326(b ) is unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and subsequent decisions because it allows a sentence above the otherwise applicable statutory maximum based on facts that are neithe r alleged in the indictment or found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Guillen-Morales concedes that this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 226-27 (1998), but seeks to preserve the issue for further review. The Government, agreeing that the issue is foreclosed, has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance. In the alternative, the Government requests an extension of time to file a brief. As the Government argues, and Gu illen-Morales concedes, the sole issue raised on appeal is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

. See United States v. Wallace , 759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 2014); United States v. PinedaArrellano , 492 F.3d 624, 625-26 (5th Cir. 2007). Because the issue is foreclosed, summary affirm ance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, the Government’s moti on for summary affirmance is GRANTED , the Government’s alternative mo tion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED , and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED

. Case: 20-50749 Document: 00515824273 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2021
[Cite as State v. Davis, 2024-Ohio-999.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO

CLERMONT COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO,

Appellee,

 - vs -

JOEL R. DAVIS,

Appellant.

:

:

:

:

:

:

CASE NO. CA2023-10-070

D E C I S I O N

3/18/2024

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM CLERMONT COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

Case No. 2023 CR 0015

Mark J. Tekulve, Clermont County Prosecuting Attorney, and Nicholas Horton, 

Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Treleven & Klingensmith, LLC, and John Treleven, for appellant.

Per Curiam.

{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by 

appellant, Joel R. Davis, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the transcript 

of proceedings and original papers from the Clermont County Court of Common Pleas, 

and upon the brief filed by appellant's counsel.
Clermont CA2023-10-070

- 2 -

{¶2} Appellant's counsel has filed a brief with this court pursuant to Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), which (1) indicates that a careful review 

of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any errors by the trial court 

prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of error may be 

predicated; (2) lists two potential errors "that might arguably support the appeal," 

Anders, at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; (3) requests that this court review the record 

independently to determine whether the proceedings are free from prejudicial error and 

without infringement of appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to 

withdraw as counsel for appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous; and 

(5) certifies that a copy of both the brief and motion to withdraw have been served upon 

appellant.

{¶3} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response 

having been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error 

prejudicial to appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of 

counsel for appellant requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is 

dismissed for the reason that it is wholly frivolous.

S. POWELL, P.J., M. POWELL and BYRNE, JJ., concur.
#### Arlene D. JENNINGS and Jennings Construction Corporation, a Florida Corporation, Appellants, v. PERRINE FISH MARKET, INC., a Florida Corporation, Claude E. Shull and Mildred S. Shull, Appellees.

No. 77-2426.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 13, 1978.

Rehearing Denied July 28, 1978.

*435Bartel & Shuford and Judy D. Shapiro, Miami, for appellants.

Scott T. Eber, Miami, for appellees.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., BARK-DULL, J., and PARKER, J. GWYNN (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff property owners in this private nuisance action appeal an order denying their motion for preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the customers of the defendants, adjoining property owners, from parking their cars in plaintiffs’ parking lot.

Defendants, Perrine Fish Market, Inc. and the owner/operators Claude and Mildred Shull own property adjacent to that of the plaintiffs, Arlene Jennings and Jennings Construction Corp., the prime tenant in the Jennings office building. In front of plaintiffs’ building is a parking lot, whereas defendants have no parking facilities on their property but do provide such facilities for their customers across the street. Nevertheless, a large number of defendants’ customers use plaintiffs’ parking lot for convenience, often creating a shortage of parking spaces for plaintiffs’ customers and tenants. Alleging a loss of established tenants and business as a result, the plaintiffs filed the instant complaint for damages and a permanent and temporary injunction seeking to enjoin the above interference of the use of their property. After a hearing, the chancellor denied their motion for a preliminary injunction. We affirm.

In view of the particular facts presented in each case, the determination to grant or deny an application for temporary injunction relief rests within the sound discretion of the chancellor guided by established rules of the principles of equity jurisdiction. *Muss*v. *City of Miami Beach,*312 So.2d 553 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Further, the issuance of a temporary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy which should be granted sparingly and with caution only after the moving party has proven sufficient facts entitling it to relief. *Bemas Corporation*v. *City of Jacksonville,*298 So.2d 467 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974).

Reviewing the facts in light of the above principles of law, we find the chancellor did not abuse his discretion in denying the plaintiff’s motion for a temporary injunction. This affirmance, however, is in no way to be construed as a decision on the merits of the case.

Affirmed.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2831 

To prohibit the non-consensual release of claims by States, municipalities, 

federally recognized Tribes, or the United States against non-debtors, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 18, 2023 

Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself, Ms. WARREN, and Mr. WELCH) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit the non-consensual release of claims by States, 

municipalities, federally recognized Tribes, or the United 

States against non-debtors, 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 ‘‘Stop shielding Assets 

5 from Corporate Known Liability by Eliminating non-debt6 or Releases Act’’ or the ‘‘SACKLER Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. NON-DEBTOR RELEASES. 

8 (a) PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN NON-DEBTOR RE9 LEASES.—Section 105(b) of title 11, United States Code, 


SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2831 IS

1 is amended by striking ‘‘a court may not’’ and all that 

2 follows, and inserting the following: ‘‘a court may not— 

3 ‘‘(1) appoint a receiver in a case under this 

4 title; or 

5 ‘‘(2) except as provided by section 524(g) of 

6 this title, enjoin or release a claim against a non7 debtor by a State, municipality, federally recognized 

8 Tribe, or the United States.’’. 

9 (b) TEMPORARY STAY ON ACTIONS AGAINST NON10 DEBTORS.—Section 105 of title 11, United States Code, 

11 is amended by adding at the end the following: 

12 ‘‘(e) Notwithstanding subsection (b)(2), a court may 

13 issue an order staying, for a period not to exceed 90 days, 

14 the commencement or continuation, including the issuance 

15 or employment of process, of a judicial, administrative, or 

16 other action or proceeding by a State, municipality, feder17 ally recognized Tribe, or the United States against a non18 debtor that was or could have been commenced before the 

19 commencement of the case under this title, or to recover 

20 a claim against a non-debtor that arose before the com21 mencement of the case under this title.’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-2597

CLIFTON B. TOMLIN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CHESAPEAKE BAY FISHING COMPANY, L.C.,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-94-790)

Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: April 22, 1996

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clifton B. Tomlin, Appellant Pro Se. Edward James Powers,

VANDEVENTER, BLACK, MEREDITH & MARTIN, Norfolk, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order entering

judgment in accordance with the jury's verdict in a civil action,

wherein the Appellant asserted that he suffered a job-related

injury as a result of the Appellee's negligence. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 1 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 2 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 3 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 4 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 5 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 6 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 7 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 8 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 9 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 10 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 11 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 12 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 13 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 14 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 15 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 16 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 17 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 18 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 19 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 20 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 21 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 22 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 23 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 24 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 25 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 26 of 27Case 1:00-cv-00081-MBC Document 42 Filed 03/01/06 Page 27 of 27
Case 1:03-cr-00024-MBC   Document 19   Filed 01/31/06   Page 1 of 2

Case 1:03-cr-00024-MBC   Document 19   Filed 01/31/06   Page 2 of 2

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2014-03-10T15:59:57-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
# Second generation Holocaust survivor shares story with NSA Philadelphia employees

/ Published May 8, 2018
PHILADELPHIA, 
Ellen Zinn grew up “a little freaked out” with the feeling of being powerless as a “2G,” or second-generation Holocaust survivor.

“Memory is defined as the power of recalling what’s been experienced or learned,” Zinn told Naval Support Activity Philadelphia employees during a Holocaust observance program May 3.  “Power ... an amazing word when we think about the fact that Jews of the Holocaust spent their lives, during and afterwards, feeling powerless.”

Zinn works with the Community Relations Council at the Esther Raab Holocaust Museum and Goodwin Education Center Jewish in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. 

It’s important to observe the Holocaust “so that we don’t forget that there are evils in this world,” Marine Col. Shaun McDoniel, NAVSUP Weapons Systems Support Marine aviation liaison, said before introducing Zinn.

“But it’s people like us, and what we do here in Philadelphia, that enable this country to be able to fight those evils to ensure they don’t ever happen again,” he said. 

Zinn’s father was a runner for the Jewish resistance to the Nazis during the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in 1943. He went to the Majdanek concentration camp after being arrested for smuggling arms and gasoline used for Molotov cocktails.

He was being transferred to Auschwitz when he and a friend jumped off the train. For nine months, including a bitter winter, they lived in trenches in the woods, which survivors called “living graves,” Zinn said. 

Her father survived on scarce food left by a local Christian farmer and weighed 85 pounds when the area was liberated by the Russian army at the end of the war. While at a Russian field hospital, he met Zinn’s mother, a Romanian-born nurse. 

After they married and the war ended, her parents returned to Warsaw, where Zinn was born. When it became clear that life in Russia-controlled Poland would be difficult, they joined the hundreds of thousands of refugees who left Eastern Europe between 1945 and 1948.

Zin grew up in New York with her brother and sister, with both a fear of authority and an obligation to help those without the power to help themselves.

“Much of what I observed and experienced during my childhood stemmed from these feelings of powerlessness,” she said. 

But there was also a sense of empowerment due to her parents’ “survivorship,” although she wasn’t aware of it until she “was a little older and little wiser.”

Later, while being considered for citizenship in the United States, Zinn said she was put in a small office to answer questions from a woman who didn’t bother to look up at her. 

The woman asked Zinn what she did. Zinn told her, “in broken, accented, but perfect English” that she was a full-time college student. 

“She looked up and swore me in. Talk about empowerment,” Zinn said. 

The Holocaust program was hosted by the DLA Troop Support Equal Employment Opportunity Office and the NAVSUP Weapons Systems Support Equal Employment Opportunity Advisory Committees.
| **INTEGRITY MUTUAL FUNDS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES** | 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 Annual Report of Integrity Mutual Funds, Inc. (the “Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Robert E. Walstad, 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 the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)            the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)            the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

 
| Date:  March 30, 2004 | By /s/ Robert E. Walstad      |
|----------------------------|-------------------------------|
|                       | --------------------------    |
|                       | Robert E. Walstad             |
|                       | Chief Executive Officer,      |
|                       | Chairman, and Director        |
|                       | (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

** **
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-50482

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JULIAN SUMMERS-MARTINEZ, 

also known as Julian Ponciano-Acosta Jr.,

also known as Julian Alvarado-Summers,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-00-CR-1819-1

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

December 12, 2001

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Julian Summers-Martinez has

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Summers-Martinez has

received a copy of counsel’s motion to withdraw and brief, and he

has not filed a response. 

Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses

no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave
No. 01-50482

-2-

to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2.
Draft 11/13/03 Attachment 5 RULE 5 Rule 5. Effective Date (Adopted 5/23/72, Revised / / ) All Rules are effective for all equipment as of the effective date of their adoption, unless indicated otherwise. When an effective date is otherwise indicated, existing equipment shall be subject to the previous Rule until the newly adopted Rule becomes effective. "Existing equipment" means all equipment that is in use or is under construction on the date of rule adoption.
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION  Pursuant to 18 United States Code §1350  As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned hereby certify that to our knowledge the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2013 of Portugal Telecom, SGPS, S.A. (the "Company") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Date:
April 30, 2014

By:

/s/ HENRIQUE MANUEL FUSCO GRANADEIROName:

Henrique Manuel Fusco GranadeiroTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerDate: April 30, 2014By:

/s/ LUIS PACHECO DE MELOName:

Luis Pacheco de MeloTitle:

Chief Financial Officer


This
certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F and shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or
otherwise subject to the liability of that section.

---



QuickLinks