alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
November 4`h, 1 - 010 To: Lisa P. Jackson Administrator United States Environment Protection Agency 

## 2010NOY -9 AM8~ 16 Urr1~, ._ Vr , t-~~ Fr: Elton Christopherson EXE.,UI Familv FarmOwner Elk Mound, Wis. Dear his . Jackson, Today I amcontacting you in support of the NRECA petition that was filed in your office in late Octk&r regarding the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines rule. I own a small family farmin Dunn County, Wis. I purchased a 125 kW back up generator in 2003 to ensure I would be able to continue running my farmduring power outages. A bonus to this purchase was my cooperative's peak shaving program . Participating in this programsaves me about $3,500 per year. This savings help me grow my farm . Making life a little easier in these hard economic times. The rules your agency are trying to start will take away that peak alert rate my Cooperative can offer . That means a $3,500 increase in my, energy bill! As a self-employed farmer, that's hard to swallow . I'd like your agency to reconsider not allowing peak shaving controls of generators like mine within the proposed 100 hour limits . The request NRECA filed does not ask for more hours of operation; just to include peak shaving use within the 100 hour limit. Since I'ma part of a Cooperative I see the savings and revenue fromthis type of arrangement, not them . Plus, we are helping to reduce energy demand during the peak times. This is a significant savings to my small business. Sincerely. 

# S Elton J . C 

### . L-1rI, rrrr,

pIstopherson Elk Nlound, Wisconsin

# ^



# I1,~ -~ o _No`IV 

### 1 ` ^o Q G 4~ 0-~1M~f1 ~~ r . ~

MID1S211j U31?doS3ad >U C N Q C C O N O = U ~ to '

M004 O C Z C d f4 U '-

.n r 0 `,° O a`) ~

r o Fe

> C ~ ~



### c 2~ L O 

### J w<<- ~ ,.
# Lycoming 

# SERVICE
652OliverStreet Williamsport, PA 17701U.S.A. 717/323-6181

DATE:

SUBJECT: MODELS AFFECTED: TIME OF COMPLIANCE: 

# INSTRUCTION

March 7, 1975 Service Instruction No. 1320 Engineering Aspects are FAA (DEER) Approved Tightening Procedure for Exhaust Manifold Components All Avco Lycoming turbocharged aircraft engines. At anytime exhaust manifold system components are removed or replaced. When it is necessary to remove or replace any part ofthe exhaust manifold system on Avco Lycoming turbocharged engines precautions must be taken when reassembling parts to the engine; uneven tightening may cause damage resulting in probable loss ofexhaust gas pressure. Exhaust manifolding for Avco Lycoming turbocharged engines, covers both right and left half ofthe engine beginning at no. 1and no. 2cylinders at the front ofthe engine and continues to the transition assembly at the rear of the engine. Ifany component ofthis system is removed or replaced, for any reason, loosen all attachments onthat side before installing the new or removed component. Then, during assembly tighten each attaching part equally and uniformly; that is, partially tighten all ofthe fastenings before securely tightening any one ofthem. Never fully tighten any part ofthe exhaust system fully before proceeding to another part on the same side ofthe engine. Tighten each part on each side ofthe engine equally. Ifthe replacement or removal of any exhaust manifold component requires the removal ofacrush-proof gasket, anew gasket should bereassembled to the engine. Donot reuse acrush-proof gasket. These gaskets areusually found at cylinder exhaust ports and at v-band clamp locations. CAUTION Anytime aclamp is assembled over anexhaust system component be very careful not to spread or force the clamp beyond its normal open position. Todo so will either distort its shape and cause an ineffective seal or it will rupture the metal and result in eventual failure ofthe clamp.
**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 Beard Company’s (the “Company”) Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William M. Beard, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to 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:  August 15, 2008 | By:  /s/ William M. Beard            

William M. BeardChairman of the Board and    Chief Executive Officer |
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 10866

In re: ANDRECO LOTT , Movant

Motion for an order authorizing the Unite d States District Court for the Northern District of Texas , Fort Worth to consider a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion

Before SMITH, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM : A jury convicted Andreco Lott, federal prisoner # 27068

- 177, of one count of conspiring to commit bank robbery, two counts of bank robbery and aiding and abetting , two counts of conspiring to obstruct interstate commerce by robbery and aiding and abetting , and four counts of using and carrying a firearm during a crime of violence and aiding and abetting

. He now moves for authorization to file a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) for using and carrying a firearm during a crime of violence and aiding and abetting as well as his convictions for bank robbery and conspiring to obstruct interstate commerce by robbery and aiding and abetting

. See 28 U.S.C. § § 2244(b)(3)(C) , 2255(h); Reyes

- Requena v. United States , 243 F.3d 893, 897

- 99 (5th Cir. 2001). Invoking Johnson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), Lott argues that these conviction s are invalid. He also argues t hat his firearms and bank robbery convictions are invalid in United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 26, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce ClerkNo. 16

- 10866

2 light of the Supreme Court’s r ecent decisions in Mathis v. United States , 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016), and McDonnell v. United States , 136 S. Ct. 2355 (2016).
Lott has not made the requisite showing. We have held that Johnson does not provide a basis for authorizing a successive § 2255 mot ion challenging a conviction under § 924(c)

. See In re Fields , 826 F.3d 785, 786

- 87 (5th Cir. 2016) . Moreover, the bank robbery and conspiracy to obstruct in terstate commerce by robber y statutes t hat Lott was convicted under d o not contain language similar to the provision that the Supreme Court found unconstitutionally vague in Johnson , c ompare Johnson , 135 S. Ct. at 2555

- 57, with 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) (bank robbery), and 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (conspiracy to
obstruct interstate commer ce by robbery) , and so Johnson has no bearing on them. Finally, Lott has failed to make a prima facie showing that Mathis and McDonnell set forth new rule s of constitutional law that have been made retroactive to cases on collateral review. See § 2255(h) (2); § 2244(b)(3)(C) ; Reyes

- Requena , 243 F.3d at 897

- 99. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Lott’s motion for authorization is
DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Lott’s motion to hold his case in abeyance in light of the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari i n Beckles v. United States , 136 S. Ct. 2510 (2016) , is DENIED.
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
 
 I, Scott
Grisanti, Chief Executive Officer and President of MedClean Technologies, Inc.,
(the “Company”), hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:
 
 1. The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, of the Company for the three month period ended
September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Quarterly Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 2. The
information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
 
 Date:
November 9, 2009
  /s/ Scott
Grisanti
 
 Scott
Grisanti
 President
and
 Chief
Executive Officer
#### CITY OF BATON ROUGE v. Johnny R. AVANTS.

No. 60142.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 21, 1977.

In re: Johnny -R. Avants applying for remedial writs.

Writ denied. There is some evidence of each element of the offense, applicant’s construction of statute relative to driver’s license expiration is incorrect, and prosecution of State DWI at time of this trial was not legally impermissible.

TATE, J.,

concurs in the denial. From the evidence, a valid suspension for at least one year beyond the offense of March 11, 1976, may be inferred; See La.R.S. 32:412, subd. A, so the offense in question occurred during the period of suspension.
Division of Advertising Practices 

United States of America 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Washington, D.C. 20580 

October 5, 2021 

Via Electronic Mail (kenplevan@gmx.com) 

Kenneth A. Plevan, Esq. 

Chair 

National Advertising Review Board 

112 Madison Avenue, 3rd Floor 

New York, NY 10016 

Re: Advertising by Avadim Health, Inc. for Theraworx Relief homeopathic products 

Dear Mr. Plevan: 

 Thank you for your letter referring a NARB Decision involving efficacy and 

establishment claims by Avadim Health, Inc. (“Avadim”) for Theraworx Relief homeopathic 

external relief products. Avadim claimed that its Theraworx Relief for Muscle Cramp & Spasm 

Foam, among other things, is “clinically proven to prevent foot and leg cramps when used daily” 

and “[r]educes symptoms associated with restless leg syndrome (RLS).” The advertiser also 

made claims that its Theraworx Relief for Joint Discomfort & Inflammation Foam “relieves 

arthritic . . . joints.” Avadim further claimed that “[a]ll Theraworx Relief products are clinically 

proven safe and effective” and prominently featured consumer testimonials and expert 

endorsements in its advertising. 

In October 2020, NAD recommended that Avadim discontinue the claims at issue in the 

NAD Challenge, including efficacy, establishment, and endorsement claims. Avadim timely 

appealed. On appeal from NAD’s initial determination, the NARB panel affirmed the NAD’s 

Decision on December 16, 2020. In its Advertiser’s Statement, Avadim disputed the findings of 

the NARB panel and stated it would not comply with NARB’s recommendation. Accordingly, 

NARB referred this matter to the FTC on January 11, 2021. 

 In addition to reviewing the NAD and NARB case record, we had several meetings with 

Avadim’s counsel regarding the claims at issue. While in negotiations with FTC staff, Avadim 

filed for bankruptcy, and its assets were purchased by Avadim Holdings, Inc., an unaffiliated 

entity. Subsequently, Avadim Holdings agreed to make significant modifications of the 

television and online advertising at issue, including discontinuing certain television ads, 

removing all references to clinical proof, deleting other implied establishment claims, and 

eliminating claims about disease conditions, including arthritis and Restless Leg Syndrome. 

Accordingly, we have determined not to take additional action at this time. In coming to this 

conclusion, we considered a number of factors related to resource allocation and enforcement 
Kenneth A. Plevan, Esq. 

October 5, 2021 

Page 2 

priorities, as well as the nature of any FTC Act violation and the type and severity of any 

consumer injury. 

 The Commission reserves the right to take such further action as the public interest may 

require. We appreciate your referral and the opportunity to support the NARB’s self-regulatory 

process. 

 Very truly yours, 

s/ Carolyn L. Hann 

Carolyn L. Hann 

 Chief of Staff for Advertising Practices 

cc: Edward F. Glynn, Jr, Esq., Locke Lord LLP
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         115,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,296,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   823,000
<INVENTORY>                                     62,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               125,000
<PP&E>                                       6,086,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,289,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,572,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,154,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,414,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,572,000
<SALES>                                      2,305,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,305,000
<CGS>                                        1,425,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,425,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,013,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             220,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (353,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (353,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (353,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
United States of America

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20580

Serena Viswanathan

Associate Director

January ___, 2022

VIA EMAIL

NAME

ADDRESS

Dear [RECIPIENT]:

The Federal Trade Commission is interested in how companies collect, moderate, and 

publish online customer reviews to ensure that they accurately reflect feedback received about 

products and services.

Consumers who rely on such reviews deserve to get a true and accurate picture of what 

other consumers think. Operators of websites or platforms that feature reviews should have 

processes in place to ensure that this happens and should be transparent about their practices. 

Doing so is important for establishing consumer trust and avoiding potentially deceptive conduct

that would violate Section 5 of the FTC Act.

One of our concerns is when companies take improper steps to avoid collecting or 

publishing negative reviews. Examples may include asking for reviews only from those likely to 

leave positive ones, preventing or discouraging submission of negative reviews, subjecting 

negative reviews to greater scrutiny, refusing to publish negative reviews, or otherwise not 

treating positive and negative reviews equally.

[DESCRIPTION OF AND QUOTATION FROM RECIPIENT’S WEBSITE.] The 

provision or use of this functionality would violate the FTC Act if it results in a misleading 

impression about what consumers think about a product or service.

You should review your policies and practices to ensure that you are neither engaging in 

any improper step described above nor providing clients with the means to do so. Pursuant to 

this review, you should terminate any services that allow for or result in consumer deception. 

Please acknowledge your receipt of this letter by sending an email to the following 

attorneys in my division, who are also available to answer any questions you may have: Michael 

Atleson at matleson@ftc.gov and Amber Lee at alee5@ftc.gov. Thank you.

Very truly yours,

Serena Viswanathan

Associate Director

Division of Advertising Practices
**Exhibit 31.2**

I, Don Civgin, certify that:

          1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of General BindingCorporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterlyreport; 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls andprocedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of thisquarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of theEvaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committeeof registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):

a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internalcontrols which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for theregistrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in thisquarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internalcontrols or in other factors that could 

 significantly affect internal controlssubsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any correctiveactions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: November 13, 2003
P. 1



# RCRA Box 321
Prepped by Ryan Dugan



### Document

Number: 

# 199)OGRC-S000 2

Docket Number: 

# F-93-OGRC-FFFF F

Printed 5/8/2007 3:36:31 PM

Sheet 199 of 259P. 2 

## 6&RC- SOOOST

TH E WHIT E HOUS E WASHINGTO N

Octobe r 19 , 199 0

Dea r Governo r Carruthers : O n behal f o f th e President , I wan t t o than k you for you r recen t correspondenc e regarding th e "benzene standard" . You r interes t i n increasin g domesti c crud e oi l production i s commendabl e an

d w e wan t t o d o al l w e can t o suppor t you r efforts . W e have raised you r concern s wit hth e Environmenta l Protection Agenc y

whic hha s worke d on the benzen e standard , als o referre d t o a s the benzen e toxicit y characteristi c rule . The y advis e u s tha t th e standard wil l no t affec t th e on-sit e reclamatio n o f crud e oi l fro m tan k bottoms . A

198 8 regulator

y action b

y EP A declare d thi s activit y exemp t fro

m regulation , an

d thei r recen t action di d no t chang e tha t exemption . EP A i s als o lookin

g a t way s t o encourag e off-sit e reclamation . Ther e ma y be som

e effec t on reclamation activitie s i n New Mexico , bu t an

y los s shoul d no t approac hth e 10,00 0 barrel s o f oi l pe r mont hnoted i n you r letter . Finally , th e standard woul d als o have an effec t o n the recovery

o f petroleu

m product s fro

m groundwater . EP

A published an interi m

fina l rul e extending th e dat e fo r complianc e unti l January

25 , 1991 , an

d the y ar e no w considering extendin g the dat e fo r a n additiona l tw o year s t o allo

w furthe r study . A decision o n thi s issue coul d b e mad e a s earl y a s nex t week . I have forwarde d a cop

y o f you r lette r t o EP A s o they

ca n infor m you o f thi s decisio n an

d an y othe r related developments . I appreciat e you r bringing you r concern s t o th e attention o f th e Administration . Pleas e le t m e kno w i f w e can b e o f furthe r assistanc e t o yo u i n an y way . Sincerely ,

Lann y Griffith/ ^ Specia l Assistan t t o th e Presiden t fo r Intergovernmenta l Affair s

Th e Honorabl e Garrey Carruther s Offic e o f the Governo r Stat e o f New

Mexic o Sant a Fe , N

M 8750 3
Exhibit 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
         Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-02856) pertaining to the LifeRate
         Systems, Inc. 1993 Stock Option Plan, as amended, in the Registration
         Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-06783) pertaining to the LifeRate
         Systems, Inc. Employee Stock Option Plan and in the Registration
         Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-04939) dated June 21, 1996, of our
         report dated March 2, 1999, with respect to the financial statements
         of LifeRate Systems, Inc. included in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB
         for the year ended December 31, 1998.

                                                /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


         Minneapolis, Minnesota
         March 29, 1999



                                       46
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED
                                  STATES CODE)

      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of SCOLR, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does
hereby certify that:

      To my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
December 31, 2002 (the "Form 10-KSB") of the Company fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and the information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

March 28, 2003                         By: /s/ Steven H. Moger
Date                                   Steven H. Moger, Chief Financial Officer






A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to SCOLR, Inc. and will be retained by SCOLR, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.