alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
www.oregonhomeownerhelp.org

Program Overview

BACKGROUND

In late 2010, Oregon received $220 million from the US Treasury to develop and deliver foreclosure 

prevention programs under the Housing Finance Agency Innovation Fund for the Hardest Hit Housing 

Markets (Hardest Hit Fund). Known as the Oregon Homeownership Stabilization Initiative, these 

programs have helped thousands of struggling homeowners by targeting the various causes of Oregon’s 

housing crisis.

CURRENT PROGRAMS

Home Rescue Program (MPA) assists unemployed and underemployed homeowners by providing up to 

12 full monthly payments (with a cap of $20,000). Homeowners might also qualify to have their 

delinquent mortgage brought current if they are no more than $10,000 in arrears.

Loan Refinancing Assistance Pilot Project (LRAPP) assists homeowners by refinancing their existing 

mortgages into a new mortgage based on their home’s current value. If approved by the existing 

mortgage servicers, homes are purchased through a short sale and then resold to the homeowners. The 

pilot project is available in a limited number of counties.

Rebuilding American Homeownership Assistance Pilot Project assists homeowners who owe more on 

their existing mortgages than their home’s current value by refinancing their existing mortgages into a 

new mortgage with a lower interest rate.

MORE INFORMATION AND APPLYING FOR HELP

Oregon homeowners can find more information, learn how to apply, and take eligibility questionnaires 

online at www.oregonhomeownerhelp.org. Homeowners can also call (503) 986-2025.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6012

ANTHONY ALEXANDER PITTMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-00-762-FO-5) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: March 1, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Alexander Pittman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Anthony Alexander Pittman appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Pittman v. United States Dist. Court , No. CA-00- 762-FO-5 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 8, 2000). 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
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 222 (Thursday, November 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 71430]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29668]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B)

AGENCY: Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration.

ACTION: Notice of availability--Recommendations from the ADS-B In 
Aviation Rulemaking Committee.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of a Report from the 
ADS-B In Aviation Rulemaking Committee, Recommendations to Define a 
Strategy for Incorporating ADS-B In Technologies into the National 
Airspace System. This committee was convened at the FAA's request to 
provide a forum for the U.S. and international aviation community to 
provide recommendations on a global strategy to proceed with ADS-B In 
while ensuring compatibility with the standards adopted for ADS-B Out. 
The FAA is currently reviewing the report to evaluate the appropriate 
course of action.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Arbuckle, Chief Scientist, 
Surveillance & Broadcast Services Pgm, Sr Advisor for Surveillance & 
PNT, NextGen JPDO, (757)-846-4225.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 30, 2010, the FAA chartered the ADS-B In Aviation 
Rulemaking Committee (ARC) to provide a forum for the U.S. and 
international aviation community to define a strategy for incorporating 
ADS-B In technologies into the National Airspace System. The ARC 
specifically was tasked to provide recommendations for proceeding with 
ADS-B In while ensuring compatibility with the ADS-B Out aviation 
standards set forth in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
Sec.  91.225, ADS-B Out equipment and use and Sec.  91.227, ADS-B Out 
equipment performance requirements.

Notice of Availability

    The ADS-B In Aviation Rulemaking Committee, Recommendations to 
Define a Strategy for Incorporating ADS-B In Technologies into the 
National Airspace System, submitted to the FAA on September 30, 2011, 
is available for review and downloading from the FAA Web site at: 
http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/portfolio/trans_support_progs/adsb/

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 9, 2011.
James Eck,
Director, Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA).
[FR Doc. 2011-29668 Filed 11-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
```
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS **AUSTIN**

Ron. X.D. Ball OOUntyAttoa'noy lIa$iglo

ceunty RbnrglO, Tux88
Duar 81ra

JW-WO~~ on thu above I)

8aotlons 3 and Qlrll AnxotaWd Watu*



### (20 of bulldlng

and 

### the road8 

### 0r tha

County; and 8hill oa4psaroation

to fha CountyRoad oad funds of any defined dirorlsmd stibdl+l8lea In the Gouaty, eyment of road oqulpxaogA.Ron. K.P. Hall, page 23

ute Dnder tha prcwlsiws of the above quoted **8t&-** the Ccmn%srionsra* **D.ourt** is sp$flcally~authari~d .*

. t,o enigJ.oy

( or permm to co e~pmyea, any roe+aonstruatioa or other maehfntwy or athex e~uipnt ia the aerw Ice of soil conservation and grsrentionof eoil waste througherosion,vcb#nerer in the Judgmentof the County Comaissionars* Court, suah mwhlnsrp or aquipmnt is not demnded for the service of building anO the upkeep of th% roede of the County. This at52tuts asea not mat; orlze the CoiaQLLseiunero * Court to leeee gradfng equipment , smh .6%trimtom and grcrdersr or an ecpipmnt oz machinery to a contraota*

# wico~~rt~: a oontmet tckbuild a road aithLn the oomty, nor **due8** it smthorlze the leasing or said squipatent amid maohincry zm8t1 of the soil irea avoidablewaste and ioao of pruduetlveness oi agisulturai cxops neoe~saryto the public mliaxe, throughper**ziiiesion to**  **use the**  **naahlnsry and**  **e+_uiprient** that may ba made orailableby the County ror euoh purposesunder written contract,**and** the **County** shall remsire frcm suoh landownerta nnd tca+payers

aompsnsetloa,

upon such uniiona basis aa may ba deelaed

equitable,and proper, for the **ao-opratlon sxtsndod**  and wniaes rsadarbd, all suoh campenaation or fund8 to the Ccmnty to **be** patd into the Road and Bridge Lund of the Ceunty; and the County Cmmlasloner8* Court may provide for **paymutts** frua landowners and taxpayer8of the County at mob **atated** in**toxvals** and in auoh amount+, ES and w-n the County tams ara ~Uooted, a# mar be equitable, r0r the use 32 the eqtkipmnnt 

### for the protection o? lands againstaontinu5.ag irrPruaeurable

inJury thxough 8Ofl ero8ieq provfd*d that the aAlPIewionex~Phart or repxwontatlte thsnef 8hall not go upon tha land of say owner te im

### prove,

### tarrnes,pxoteot, of dft,ch such ltmd until required to do 80 in **wrltlng** by ~udh **Ol*neX;** and provided 

### further, that the Dcnmieal.onass* Coawt or tepx8sentatfvsa thereof shall not b8 required to do suah imgrovia& tarraoing,protaotAng, and **dftching** anleea ruch Court shall detomlne th~+t

arch work is of scnm publio **benefit** and said Coaxt al~cto 

### to do 

### the **wurLa**Xm. X. 9. ??all, psa SIn opinionwitton Au@mt 10, 19% **br BOQ.** 

***Mm t.**  **22&i, Amirtant**  Attorney Oeneral, **addrem ed**  

## to lion.X~ll Condroll, CountyJbd@, Throok~wtoa, Texas, tiia departmnt held that;

‘8A bounty Camml8a:oners* Court h&n no authority, l **rgresa** or bplld, to hire 

## out aountf **xond** mmhlnery while euuoh mmhinery is idlo.*
In view oi the iloregoiq,ycus **quoetian** I.8w**8peotfully** mmwed ,in **th%** n%gatln.

Truatfng thatwe hnve fully answeredyour inquay* w ranafrr

APPROVEDMAR E, 1940

(.isLa&.~ ATTORNEY Gl3ihi-l;rAL 03 TEXAS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Financial Statements and Notes thereto incorporated in Part I, Item 1. of this
Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1999
<CASH>                                           3,416
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,416
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,416
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              281
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,150
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,276
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,546
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (25,246)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (25,246)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (0.004)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.004)


</TABLE>
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Aprogenex
Inc.'s previously filed Registration Statements on from S-8 Nos.
33-80358, 33-94286 and 33-39757 and on Form S-3 Nos. 33-92780,
33-95014 and 33-39849 of our report dated February 5, 1997,
appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB
of Aprogenex, Inc., for the year ended December 31, 1996.



ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Houston, Texas
March 26, 1997
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          10,917
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,866
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,961
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,374
<PP&E>                                         230,672
<DEPRECIATION>                                (77,260)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 645,448
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           44,770
<BONDS>                                        594,838
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           31,231
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           245
<OTHER-SE>                                     164,924
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   645,448
<SALES>                                         25,928
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               149,957
<CGS>                                           21,633
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  154,898
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   607
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,575
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,424
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (47,605)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,021)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (46,584)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (3,675)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (51,039)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (3.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.14)


</TABLE>
From: Ed Milliken [mailto:emilliken@bowerstonshale.com]

Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 2:46 PM

To: Raymond, Gabrielle <graymond@rti.org>

Subject: RE: Bowerston green brick testing results

These samples were from two plants, so I adjusted the spreadsheet to reflect that. Each test was from a shale pit near each plant location that we have been mining for decades and intend to mine for decades longer. I hope this answers your questions.

Ed Milliken President & CEO, The Bowerston Shale Compan y | 515 Main Street | PO Box 199 | Bowerston, OH 44695| Phone: 740

- 269

- 2921 | Fax: 740

- 269

- 5456 | mailto:emilliken@bowerstonshale.com | The Bowerston Shale Company | Brick & Pavers

This e

- mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e

- mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received

this e

- mail in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Thank you for your cooperation

<<Copy of Green Brick Testing Results

- 032515BIA

- to EPA May 4 2015_Bowerston (2).xlsx>>

<<The Bowerston Shale Co. Hg Results Sept 2014.pdf>>

From: Raymond, Gabrielle <graymond@rti.org>

Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 10:41 AM

To: 'emilliken@bowerstonshale.com' <emilliken@bowerstonshale.com>

Subject: Bowerston green brick testing results

Hello Mr. Milliken,

I work with RTI International, the contractor working with the U.S. EPA in developing air regulations for the Brick industry, I got your name and contact information from Susan Miller of

the BIA. The BIA has provided EPA with a spreadsheet of mercury green brick testing results with the intent to add a mercury raw material variability factor to the Mercury MACT floor limit. In order to incorporate this raw material data, EPA needs to know a little bit mor e about the general location of the clay deposits being used by the facilities.

I’m attaching a spreadsheet of the Bowerston facilities that provided green brick testing results

to EPA via BIA. I’ve added some columns at the end to be filled out with the Name of Clay Deposit, Geological Age of the Deposit, and Latitude/Longitude of the Clay Deposit. Any information you are able to provide about the clay deposits will be much appreciated and helpful!

Thank you for your help,

GabrielleGabrielle Raymond

RTI International

3040 Cornwallis Road

P.O. Box 12194 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

Phone: (919) 541

- 7015

<< Green Brick Testing Results

- 032515BIA

- to EPA May 4 2015_Bowerston.xlsx>>
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3747 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3747

 To allow individuals with disabilities to campaign for elected office 
         without losing access to federally supported benefits.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 7, 2024

 Mr. Casey (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Padilla, 
 Mr. Welch, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Markey, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Merkley, Mr. 
 Whitehouse, Mr. Fetterman, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Blumenthal, Ms. Duckworth, 
  Mr. Booker, and Mr. Wyden) introduced the following bill; which was 
          read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To allow individuals with disabilities to campaign for elected office 
         without losing access to federally supported benefits.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Removing Access Barriers to Running 
for Elected Office for People with Disabilities Act''.

SEC. 2. DISREGARDING CAMPAIGN WORK PERFORMED BY INDIVIDUALS WITH 
              DISABILITIES FOR PURPOSES OF FEDERALLY SUPPORTED 
              BENEFITS.

    (a) In General.--Any campaign work performed by a qualified 
individual, and any compensation received by such individual for such 
work, shall be disregarded for the purpose of determining such 
individual's eligibility for, and amount of, benefits or assistance 
under any Federal program or under any State or local program financed 
in whole or in part with Federal funds.
    (b) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Campaign work.--The term ``campaign work'' means work 
        performed by an individual as a candidate for an elected 
        Federal, State, or local office.
            (2) Qualified individual.--The term ``qualified 
        individual'' means an individual who is entitled to a benefit 
        under title II or XVI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401 
        et seq., 1381 et seq.) by reason of a disability.
                                 <all>
```
# L_2005282EN.01002901.xml

| 26.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 282/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 282/29

---

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation EC (No) 1259/2005 of 27 July 2005 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of tartaric acid originating in the People's Republic of China

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 200 of 30 July 2005
  )

On page 90, in Article 1(2):

for:

for

| ‘Company | Anti-Dumping Duty | TARIC Additional Code |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Hangzou Bioking Biochemical Engineering Co., Ltd, Hangzou, People’s Republic of China. | 2,4  % | A687 ’ |

‘Company

Anti-Dumping Duty

TARIC Additional Code

Hangzou Bioking Biochemical Engineering Co., Ltd, Hangzou, People’s Republic of China.

2,4  %

A687 ’

read:

read

| ‘Company | Anti-Dumping Duty | TARIC Additional Code |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Hangzhou Bioking Biochemical Engineering Co., Ltd, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China. | 2,4  % | A687 ’ |

‘Company

Anti-Dumping Duty

TARIC Additional Code

Hangzhou Bioking Biochemical Engineering Co., Ltd, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China.

2,4  %

A687 ’

Where applicable, the correct spelling of the company names and seat, as set out above, should also apply throughout the text of Regulation (EC) No 1259/2005 wherever they appear, and namely under recitals (8)(b), (17), (39) and (122).

---
#### Succession of Margaret R. MOUSTIER, widow of Louis R. Moustier.

No. 62655.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 1, 1978.

In re: John D. Lambert, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. 359 So.2d 1043.

Writ denied.

DIXON, J., and CALOGERO, J., would grant the writ.

TATE, J.,

concurs, because he believes the attorneys may still have their day in court, not being parties to the opposition to the tableaus.
#### Gary N. WIGGINS, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, Respondent.

No. 70-893.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 4, 1970.

Habeas corpus denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 208 (Tuesday, October 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 55777]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28452]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Kansas Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Kansas Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 8:00 
a.m. and adjourn at 12:30 p.m. on Thursday, November 20, 1997, at the 
State Capitol, 300 S.W. 10th Street, Room 313-S, Topeka, Kansas 66603. 
The purpose of the meeting is planning and to hold a briefing on equal 
employment opportunity in State government.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Melvin L. Jenkins, Director of the 
Central Regional Office, 913-551-1400 (TDD 913-551-1414). Hearing-
impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services 
of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at 
least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.


    Dated at Washington, DC, October 20, 1997.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 97-28452 Filed 10-27-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
#### Russell J. GOLDEN d/b/a Show Club, Petitioner, v. STATE BEVERAGE DEPARTMENT of Florida and Director of State Beverage Department of Florida, Respondents.

No. 69-379.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Aug. 1, 1969.

Stay order denied.
**Map Collections**

----

[Rights and Reproductions]

----

**Bangladesh physiography.**

United States. Central Intelligence Agency.

**CREATED/PUBLISHED** [Washington : Central Intelligence Agency, 2011]

**NOTES**Relief shown by shading and spot heights. 

"803501AI (G00535) 6-11." 

Includes location map. 

 Scale 1:3,500,000 ; Lambert conformal conic proj., standard parallels 21�40' N 21�40' N (E 880--E 930/N 260--N 210).

**SUBJECTS**Bangladesh--Maps.Maps.Bangladesh.

**MEDIUM**1 map : col. ; 23 x 17 cm.

**CALL NUMBER****G7645** 2011 .U5

**REPOSITORY**Library of Congress Geography and Map Division Washington, D.C. 20540-4650 USA 

**DIGITAL ID****g7645****ct003450** http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gmd/**g7645**.**ct003450**

**PREVIOUS****NEXT****NEW SEARCH**
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, 

F/K/A THE BANK OF NEW YORK AS 

TRUSTEE FOR THE HOLDERS OF 

EQCC ASSET BACKED CERTIFICATES, 

SERIES 2001-1F,

Respondents

v.

KARL M. POGONOVICH,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 147 WAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of August, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all 

remaining issues. The issues rephrased for clarity are:

(1) Did the Superior Court depart from accepted judicial practices or abuse its 

discretion in finding as fact that Petitioner admitted to being personally 

served with the complaint in mortgage foreclosure? 

(2) Did the Superior Court depart from accepted judicial practices or abuse its 

discretion in concluding as a matter of law that Petitioner had been served 

with original process with the underlying foreclosure complaint?

Justice Baer did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.