alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### 253H0760 CHEM110629813868035 C06H11

X X

X Page 1 SANITIZED SUBMISSION

### X

Page 2 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONDennisse Hooper Environmental Manager Chemetall Foote Corporation 348 Holiday Inn Drive Kings Mountain NC 28086 Luann Shoemaker Agent Compliance Services International 7501 Bridgeport Way West Lakewood WA 98499 lshoemaker@complianceservices.com 703-425-2110

Luann Shoemaker Agent Compliance Services International 7501 Bridgeport Way West Lakewood WA 98499 lshoemaker@complianceservies.com 703-425-2110 

## X X

X X Page 3 SANITIZED SUBMISSION

## X

Silicate (2-) hexafluoro-cesium 16923-87-8 

## X 153363 CAS Expert Services.pdf 

### Cs2SiF6

Cesium hexafluorosilicate.gif Page 4 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 5 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 6 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 7 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONImpurities redacted.xls

XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X 

## X

Page 8 SANITIZED SUBMISSION

## (1)

XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X 

## X

Page 9 SANITIZED SUBMISSION

## (2)

XXX XXX XXX 

### X XXX XXX XXX 

### X

Page 10 SANITIZED SUBMISSION

### 1000 4500

Brazing (metal joining) agent 100 100 0 0 100 0

Page 11 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 12 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 13 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 14 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 15 SANITIZED SUBMISSION

### 0

Page 16 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 17 SANITIZED SUBMISSIONPage 18 SANITIZED SUBMISSION001 stuctural diagram of silicate(2-) hexafluorocesium Cesium hexafluorosilicate.gif Pt.I, Sec.B, 1e. 1 002 Impurities redacted version Impurities redacted.xls Pt.I, Sec.B, 3. 1 003 MSDS MSDS Caesium hexafluorosilicate_US.pdf Worksheet: Physical State | Worksheet: pH 6 004 CAS Information CAS Expert Services.pdf Pt.I, Sec.B, 1c. 2

Page 19 SANITIZED SUBMISSION003 

## X
6 Measured 17

3.5-7.5 Estimate 10% aqueous solution
Page 20 SANITIZED SUBMISSION

## ATTACHMENT HEADER SHEET Attachment Number 001 Attachment Name stuctural diagram of silicate(2-) hexafluoro-cesium 

## Associated PMN Section Number

Pt.I, Sec.B, 1e. Does not contain CBI 

## Report Number CHEM110629813868035

## ATTACHMENT HEADER SHEET Attachment Number 002 Attachment Name Impurities redacted version 

## Associated PMN Section Number

Pt.I, Sec.B, 3. Does not contain CBI 

## Report Number CHEM110629813868035

## ATTACHMENT HEADER SHEET Attachment Number 003 Attachment Name MSDS 

## Associated PMN Section Number Worksheet: Physical State | Worksheet: pH

Does not contain CBI 

## Report Number CHEM110629813868035

## ATTACHMENT HEADER SHEET Attachment Number 004 Attachment Name CAS Information 

## Associated PMN Section Number

Pt.I, Sec.B, 1c. Does not contain CBI 

## Report Number CHEM110629813868035
#### William GILLS et al. v. OUR LADY OF THE LAKE HOSPITAL et al.

No. 62614.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 1, 1978.

In re: Dr. James A. Poche, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Writ denied, with reservation: Our denial is without prejudice to the defendant to raise the issue by a formal dilatory exception pleading prematurity. See also *Steeg v. Lawyers Title Ins. Co.,*329 So.2d 719 (La.1976).

DIXON, J.

concurs only because this disposition might be more efficient than our granting a writ; the Court of Appeal was clearly in error in failing to rule on applicant’s contention.
#### Tobias SIMON, Appellant, v. Howard A. ROSE and Royal Flagg Jonas, Appellees.

No. 70-983.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 4, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
#### William Henry KIRKENDOLL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-1022.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 2, 1971.

William Henry Kirkendoll, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s meftibrandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of this appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. George RANALLI, Petitioner, v. Hon. William Clayton JOHNSON, as Judge of the Court of Record, in and for Broward County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 71-545.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 29, 1971.

Prohibition denied.
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 13-1632

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

JOSÉ A. GARCÍA-ORTIZ,

Defendant, Appellant.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on July 6, 2015, is amended

as follows:

On page 4, line 1, change "back seat" to "backseat".

On page 20, line 7, change "the" to "The".
#### Nancy C. LAWLESS, Appellant, v. TRACY FRUIT COMPANY, a Florida corporation, et al., Appellees.

No. 71-270.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 15, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 23.1


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                    -----------------------------------------


To the Board of Directors and Stockholders
Sel-Leb Marketing, Inc.


We hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  Post-Effective
Amendment No. 2 to the Registration  Statement (No. 333-19625) on Form S-8 which
was previously filed by Sel-Leb Marketing, Inc. (the "Company") of our report on
the consolidated  financial statements of the Company and its subsidiary,  dated
April 1, 2002,  which report  appears  elsewhere  in this Annual  Report on Form
10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.


                                                 /s/ J.H. COHN LLP

                                                     J.H. COHN LLP

Roseland, New Jersey
April 1, 2002
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
    We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (333-01574), (333-12789) and (333-24581); on Form S-3
(333-10383) and (333-14025); and on Form S-4 (333-13133) of U.S. Office Products
Company of our report dated May 23, 1996, except for Note N as to which the date
is October 14, 1996, relating to the financial statements of Bay State Computer
Group, Inc. included in U.S. Office Products Company's Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended April 26, 1997.
 
                                         Parent, McLaughlin & Nangle
 
                                         Boston, Massachusetts
 
June 30, 1997
#### In re Charles William ESTES v. STATE of Alabama. Ex parte Charles William Estes.

77-370.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

April 21, 1978.

*1058James D. Sullivan, Mobile, for petitioner.

No brief for the State.

BLOODWORTH, Justice.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied because the admission of the ordinance is not a prerequisite to admission of the results of the PEI test. In denying this writ, we point out that we do not necessarily agree with the Court of Criminal Appeals’ holding on “harmless error.” Nor, do we agree that in *Patton v. City of Decatur,*337 So.2d 321 (Ala.1976) there was no other evidence of intoxication.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and FAULKNER, AL-MON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.
No. 00-560.

#### Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd. *v.*Wallace.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORT 
HOWARD CORPORATION'S UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR 
THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY 
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000038195
<NAME> FORT HOWARD CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>               9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                              5
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     154
<ALLOWANCES>                                        3
<INVENTORY>                                       151
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  337
<PP&E>                                          2,121
<DEPRECIATION>                                    874
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  1,616
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             311
<BONDS>                                         2,305
<COMMON>                                        1,159
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,444)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    1,616
<SALES>                                         1,323
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                1,323
<CGS>                                             786
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     786
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                167
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   245
<INCOME-TAX>                                      102
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               143
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (18)
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                      126
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
        







</TABLE>
Exhibit
23.2


CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM










The Board
of Directors of ONEOK Partners GP, L.L.C. as General Partner of ONEOK Partners,
L.P.:












We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-137419) on Form S-3 of ONEOK Partners, L.P. (the Partnership) of our report
dated February 28, 2007 except for Note L as to which the date is February 27,
2008, with respect to the consolidated statements of income, cash flows, and
changes in partners' equity and comprehensive income for year ended December 31,
2006 of ONEOK Partners, L.P., which report appears in the December 31, 2008,
annual report on Form 10-K of the Partnership.






/s/  KPMG
LLP






February
24, 2009






Tulsa,
OK
EXHIBIT 10.29

                                 (SEAL)
                                            UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                                            PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
FILING RECEIPT                              ASSISTANT SECRETARY AND COMMISSIONER
CORRECTED                                   OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS
                                            WASHINGTON, D.C. 20231

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S>                  <C>          <C>             <C>             <C>                 <C>     <C>     <C>
APPLICATION NUMBER   FILING DATE  GRP ART UNIT    FIL FEE REC'D   ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.  DRWGS  TOT CL  IND CL
                                      1308           $385.00        MANSPA196            4      17       3
</TABLE>

ROBERT M DOWNEY
SUITE 1480
701 BRICKELL AVENUE
MIAMI FL 33131

Receipt is acknowledged of this nonprovisional Patent Application. It will be
considered in its order and you will be notified as to the results of the
examination. Be sure to provide the U.S. APPLICATION NUMBER, FILING DATE, NAME
OF APPLICANT, and TITLE OF INVENTION when inquiring about this application. Fees
transmitted by check or draft are subject to collection. Please verify the
accuracy of the data presented on this receipt. If an error is noted on this
Filing Receipt, please write to the Application Processing Division's Customer
Correction Branch within 10 days of receipt. Please provide a copy of the Filing
Receipt with the changes noted thereon.

APPLICANT(S)       PIERRE G. MANSUR, MIAMI, FL.

CONTINUING DATA AS CLAIMED BY APPLICANT--PROVISIONAL APPLICATION NO.


FOREIGN FILING LICENSE GRANTED 12/19/96     * SMALL ENTITY *
TITLE
SYSTEM AND METHOD OF VAPOR RECOVERY IN INDUSTRIAL WASHING EQUIPMENT

PRELIMINARY CLASS: 210

                                 (SEE REVERSE)
260 La. 106

#### Clifford DEANE and Adeline Deane v. Roger O. McGEE et al.

No. 51944.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 7, 1971.

In re: State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 253 So.2d 655.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.

Granted. Case fixed for argument on Dec. 15, 1971.
#### GREYHOUND LINES, INC., GREYHOUND LINES-EAST DIVISION and Florida Limousine Service, Inc., Petitioners, v. William H. BEVIS et al., Respondents.

No. 42917.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 11, 1973.

John H. Wilbur, Jacksonville, for petitioner Greyhound Lines, Inc. and Greyhound Lines-East Division.

Gregory A. Presnell, Orlando, for petitioner Florida Limousine Service, Inc.

Prentice P. Pruitt, Chief Staff Counsel and Jerry M. Johns, Staff Counsel, Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

By petition for writ of certiorari we have for review Order No. 10290 of the Florida Public Service Commission, dated September 15, 1972.

*419After oral argument and upon consideration of the petition, the briefs, and the record, we conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law. The petition is therefore denied.

It is so ordered.

CARLTON, C. J., ERVIN, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., and WIGGINTON, District Court Judge, concur.
# Court of Appeals
**First District of Texas**

BILL OF COSTS

No. 01

- 15

- 00286

- CV

Paula M. Miller

v
.
JAS Family Limited Partnership#4, LTD.

NO. 65767 IN THE 149TH DISTRICT COURT OF BRAZORIA C OUNTY

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

MT FEE FILIN G $10.00 $195.00 06/08/2015 03/27/2015 E

- PAID NOT PAID APE ANT



### The costs incurred on appeal to the First Court of Appeals Houston, Texas are $205.00.

Court costs in this case have been taxed in this Court’s judgment

I, Christopher A. Prine , Clerk o f th e Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, do hereby certify that this is a true statement of the costs of appeal in this case.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand and the seal of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, this September 1 8 , 2015

.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SATWINDER SINGH,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-70337

Agency No. A071-768-170

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 25, 2010** 

Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Satwinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen

exclusion proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing

for abuse of discretion, Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir. 2004), we

FILED

JUN 02 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-70337

deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen

because the motion was filed more than two years after the BIA’s May 4, 2005,

order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to demonstrate materially

changed circumstances in India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the filing

deadline, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Malty, 381 F.3d at 945 (“The

critical question is . . . whether circumstances have changed sufficiently that a

petitioner who previously did not have a legitimate claim for asylum now has a

well-founded fear of future persecution.”). 

Singh’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
SUBSIDIARIES



     1.   Downey Affiliated Insurance Agency, (a California corporation)

     2.   Downey  Savings  and  Loan  Association,   F.A.,  (a  federal  savings
          association)

     3.   DSL  Service  Company,  (a  California  corporation,  a  wholly  owned
          subsidiary of Downey Savings and Loan Association, F.A.)

     4.   Butterfield Services, Inc., (a California corporation,  a wholly owned
          subsidiary of Downey Savings and Loan Association, F.A.)

                                       1
<PAGE>
CHIEF JUSTICE

 ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

 NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

 DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

 GINA M. BENAVIDES

 GREGORY T. PERKES

 NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

 DORIAN E. RAMIREZ

NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361-888-0416 (TEL)

361-888-0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 78539

956-318-2405 (TEL)

956-318-2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa

Court of Appeals 

Thirteenth District of Texas 

March 23, 2015

Hon. Bennett Stahl

One Riverwalk Place, Suite 1800

700 N. St. Mary's Street

San Antonio, TX 78205

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Steven J. Pawlowski

Shackelford, Melton & McKinley, LLP

3333 Lee Parkway, Tenth Floor

Dallas, TX 75231

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Jonathan Pauerstein

755 E Mulberry Ave, Suite 200

San Antonio, TX 78212-4285

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13-13-00713-CV

Tr.Ct.No. 45,434

Style: Arcturus Corporation v. Espada Operating, LLC, Bengal Energy, L.P., Lee 

Roy Billington, Rodney Rolston and Mitchell K. Michelson

On February, 18, 2015, this Court ordered the parties to mediation. Parties were 

to inform the Court in writing within seven days of the mediator chosen. This 

information is now overdue. If the Court does not receive this information in seven days 

from the date of this correspondence then it will proceed to appoint a mediator.

Very truly yours,

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk

DER:ch
**Exhibit 31(a)**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. § 7241) 

 

I, Pierre-Olivier Beckers, Chief Executive Officer, certify that: 

 

1) I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Delhaize America, Inc.; 

 

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

 

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

 

4) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

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

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

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

 

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

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: August 16, 2005
#### Angelo A. DONATELLO, Appellant, v. Marshall K. KENT et al., Appellees.

No. 71-574.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 18, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Ronald D. LEGENDRE.

No. 61719.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 17, 1978.

In re: Ronald D. Legendre applying for writs of certiorari and review. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Granted. The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is ordered that a Writ of Certiorari issue herein, directing the Honorable John S. Covington, Judge of the Nineteenth Judicial District, Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge, to transmit to the Supreme *941Court of Louisiana, on or before the 31st day of March, 1978, the record in duplicate, or a certified copy of the record in duplicate, of the proceedings complained of by the relator herein, to the end that the validity of said proceedings may be ascertained.

It is further ordered that the aforesaid Judge of said Court and the respondent through counsel shall show cause, in this court, on a date to be fixed by this court, at 10 o’clock A.M., why the relief prayed for in the petition of the relator should not be granted.
Do you want to vote absentee?
Here’s how to get started.

CONTACT YOUR
[] VOTING ASSISTANCE OFFICER