alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392]
 ACTION: Notice of registration.
 SUMMARY: Registrants listed below have applied for and been granted registration by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as bulk manufacturers of various classes of schedule I and II controlled substances.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The companies listed below applied to be registered as bulk manufacturers of various basic classes of controlled substances. Information on previously published notices is listed in the table below. No comments or objections were submitted for these notices. Company
FR Docket
PublishedAMRI Rensselaer, Inc
83 FR 5808
February 9, 2018.Stepan Company
83 FR 9029
March 2, 2018.Research Triangle Institute
83 FR 10523
March 9, 2018.Rhodes Technologies
83 FR 12407
March 21, 2018.Synthcon, LLC
83 FR 13141
March 27, 2018.National Center for Natural Products—Research NIDA MPROJECT
83 FR 13522
March 29, 2018.Insys Manufacturing LLC
83 FR 13522
March 29, 2018.Navinta LLC
83 FR 13521
March 29, 2018.
 The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of these registrants to manufacture the applicable basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated each of the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing each company's physical security systems, verifying each company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing each company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the DEA has granted a registration as a bulk manufacturer to the above listed companies. Dated: June 12, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2018-13223 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

COMMISSIONERS: Joseph J. Simons, Chairman 

Noah Joshua Phillips 

Rohit Chopra 

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter 

Christine S. Wilson 

In the Matter of 

DOCKET NO. 9386 

NTT GLOBAL DATA CENTERS 

AMERICAS, INC., as successor in 

interest to RagingWire Data 

Centers, Inc., 

a corporation. 

ORDER EXTENDING WITHDRAWAL FROM ADJUDICATION 

On April 15, 2020, under provisions of Commission Rule of Practice 3.25(c), 16 C.F.R. § 

3.25(c), the Commission issued an order withdrawing this matter from adjudication until June 

15, 2020, to enable the Commission to consider a proposed Consent Agreement. The 

Commission has now determined that there is good cause to extend the withdrawal by an 

additional two weeks in order to give full consideration to the issues presented. Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDER(D, pursuant to Commission Rule of Practice 4.3(b), 16 C.F.R. § 4.3(b), 

that all claims against Respondent in this proceeding shall continue to be withdrawn in their 

entirety from adjudication until June 29, 2020; and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Commission Rule of Practice 3.25(b), 16 

C.F.R. § 3.25(b), that the proposed Consent Agreement shall not be placed on the public record

unless and until it is accepted by the Commission. 

By the Commission&RPPLVVLRQHU6ODXJKWHUQRWSDUWLFLSDWLQJ. 

April J. Tabor 

Secretary 

SEAL: 

ISSUED:-XQH
263 La. 23

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Donald HARRIS.

No. 52497.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 4, 1972.

Woodson T. Callihan, Jr., Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Harry H. Howard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Sargent Pitcher, Jr., Dist. Atty., Ralph L. Roy, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Through habeas corpus proceedings the defendant, Donald Harris, was granted an out of time appeal from a conviction of aggravated burglary, La.R.S. 14:60, for which he was sentenced to serve twenty years at hard labor in the State Penitentiary-

No Bills of Exceptions were reserved by counsel for the defendant during the course of the trial. The public defender appointed to assist the defendant in pursuing his out of time appeal filed one Bill of Exceptions with the trial court. Because the error alleged does not pertain to a Bill of Exceptions reserved during the course of the trial, the trial judge refused to sign it.

Consequently, as no Bills of Exceptions have been perfected, we are limited on appeal to a review of the pleadings and proceedings for discoverable error. La.C.Cr. P. art. 920; State v. Ash, 257 La. 337, 242 So.2d 535 (1971). We find none.

The bill of exceptions reserved is not before us as there was no ruling by which the defendant could reserve a bill. However, even if we were to treat the bill of exceptions as a Motion for a New Trial, which alleges essential elements of the crime of aggravated battery were not proven during the defendant’s trial, we would be forced to conclude it is without merit.

The facts developed in the testimony show that the defendant was surprised while he was in the dwelling of Mrs. Tol-son, the victim, without authority. The defendant threw Mrs. Tolson to the floor, dumped the contents of her purse out taking $28.00 therefrom, forced her to give him other money she had hidden in the house, then tried to force her onto the bed in her bedroom, and was in the act of unzipping his pants when Mrs. Tolson’s husband returned home. Mrs. Tolson grabbed the defendant upon realizing her husband had returned home, and between herself and her husband, they were able to subdue and hold the defendant until the police arrived.

■ There is evidence of every essential element of the crime of aggravated burglary. There is evidence that the defendant did make an unauthorized entry of an inhabited dwelling and did commit a battery upon the person of Mrs. Tolson. We are forbidden to pass upon the weight and sufficiency of the evidence.

For these reasons, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.
International airmail postage is required if not mailed in the 

U.S. Postal Service, APO/FPO system, or diplomatic pouch. 

U.S. Postage Paid

39 USC 3406

PAR AVION

OFFICIAL ABSENTEE BALLOTING MATERIAL – FIRST CLASS MAIL

NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IN THE U.S. MAIL – DMM 703.8.0

To

From

(Your name and current complete military or overseas mailing address)

(Your local election office in the United States. Check your State’s pages in the Voting Assistance 

Guide on FVAP.gov for contact information.)

Ballot Enclosed for __________ Election. 

(MM/YY)
### EPA **/ SEHSC**  **D4 ECA**  **M EETING**  

### P **ROPOSED** 

### M **EETING** 

### A **GENDA** 

### N **OVEMBER** 

### 17 **, 2014**  1 1 : 3 0 AM - 1 : 3 0 P M EDT

1 1:3 0 

### Introductions / Meeting Goals K. Thomas / P. Lewis 11:35 

### Update on SEHSC Progress R. Mait
1 2 : 00 

### Feedback **on SEHSC Submissions** P. Lewis 12 : 30 

### EC **A N ext Steps**  All 12:5 0 

### Collaborative A **ctivities** All
1 : 15 

### Path Forward All 1:3 0 

### Ad **journ** P. Lewis



### •
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          78,566
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         201,950
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                84,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  1,165,919
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      1,688,141
<ALLOWANCE>                                     16,693
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,477,318
<DEPOSITS>                                   2,763,789
<SHORT-TERM>                                   240,283
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            232,680
<LONG-TERM>                                     26,468
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,630
<OTHER-SE>                                     194,468
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               3,477,318
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                117,459
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               51,290
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 5,982
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               174,731
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              82,551
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              95,861
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           78,870
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 642
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                253,450
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 69,273
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      40,904
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    40,904
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.94
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.92
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.24
<LOANS-NON>                                      8,882
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                16,086
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,175
<RECOVERIES>                                       782
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               16,693
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            16,693
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         16,693
        

</TABLE>
GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

District Department of the Environment 

Office of the Director ***


Mr. Shawn M. Garvin 

Regional Administrator, Region 3 

U.S Environmental Protection Agency
 

Mail Code 3RAOO
 

1650 Arch Street
 

Philadelphia, PA 19103
 

Subject:	 Negative Declarations for Four CTG Categories: Auto and Light-Duty Truck Assembly 

Coatings; Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials; Paper, Film and Foil Coatings; and 

Flatwood Paneling 

Dear Mr. Garvin: 

Pursuant to the requirements of the State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the Implementation 

of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992), the District 

Department of the Environment (DDOE) is officially certifying that there are no sources located in the 

District of Columbia subject to the reasonably available control technology (RACT) control techniques 

guidelines (CTGs) for the following source categories: (I) auto and light-duty truck assembly coatings; 

(2) fiberglass boat manufacturing materials; (3) paper, film and foil coatings; and (4) f1atwood paneling. 

In view of the above, the District of Columbia will not be adopting the CTG RACT regulations for four
 

source categories as would otherwise be required by § I82(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act.
 

The District is in nonattainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ground-level 

ozone. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are precursors to ozone. Pursuant to § 183(e)(3)(C) of the 

Clean Air Act, EPA has determined that CTGs are substantially as effective as national regulations in 

reducing emissions ofVOCs in ozone nonattainment areas from Group II, III and IV product categories 

(October 7, 2008, 73 FR 58481), which include these four source categories. 

In order to identify sources in the District of Columbia potentially subject to regulations based upon the 

CTGs, databases such as the U.S. Census Bureau's County Business Patterns and Dun & Bradstreet were 

queried using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes provided in the Federal 

Register notice for the subject CTGs. Business addresses were identified for several source categories, 

and staff inspected locations to ensure that CTG-related activities were not taking place. The Air Quality 

Division's Permitting and Enforcement Branch staff was solicited for knowledge of sources. As a result, 

no sources potentially affected by the four CTGs in the District of Columbia were identified. 

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Cecily Beall at (202) 535­


2626 or cecily.beall@dc.gov.
 

0[t 'Y)j12 N ­

Interim 

Mau~~o~:l~ Director 

Cc:	 David Arnold, Acting Director, Air Protection Division, EPA Region 3
 

Cecily Beall, Associate Director, Air Quality Division, DDOE
 

51 N Street, NE, 5th Fl., Washington, DC 20002 Phone: (202) 535-2250 Facsimile: (202) 481-3771 DISTRICI'DEPARTMENT 

OFTfIE I':' 'VIRO. ~II'.. T
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 17, 2022

No. 04-22-00028-CR

Matthew ROSE,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas

Trial Court No. CRW1910200

Honorable Lynn Ellison, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The clerk’s record, which was filed in this appeal on March 2, 2022, does not contain a 

trial court’s certification of the defendant’s right of appeal, pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas 

Rules of Appellate Procedure. It is therefore ORDERED that the trial court cause the trial court 

clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certification within twenty days from the 

date of this order.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 17th day of March, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Webinar Attendees: The Motors Preliminary Analysis Meeting

Meeting Date: Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Name Title Organization Street City State Zip Phone Fax Email

Andersen, Eric S. Mechanical Engineer/ 

Manager

Project Manager

Pacific Northwest National 

Laboratory (PNNL)

902 Battelle Boulevard

P.O. Box 999

MSIN K6-05

Richland WA 99352 509-375-2735 N/A eric.andersen@pnnl.gov

Blum, Helcio Principal Research 

Associate

Lawrence Berkeley National 

Laboratory (LBNL)

1 Cyclotron Rd 90R4000 Berkeley CA 94720 N/A N/A hblum@lbl.gov

Bonnett, Austin H. Engineering Consultant Navigant Consulting, Inc. 25341 July Avenue Gallatin MO 64640 660-828-4152 660-828-4021 austin.bonnett@nidec-motor.com

Boyd, Brian Engineer Pacific Northwest National 

Laboratory (PNNL)

902 Battle Blvd, P.O. Box 

999

Richland WA 99532 509-371-6724 509-372-4370 brian.boyd@pnl.gov

Budzynski, Rick Senior Product 

Development Engineer

Baldor Electric Company 6040 Ponders Court Greenville SC 29615 864-281-2454 N/A rick.budzynski@baldor.abb.com

Jordan, Howard Consultant N/A 329 Explorer Lakeway TX 78734 512-261-3541 N/A hjordan99@att.net

Kundu, Bijit Project Manager II Energy Solutions 1610 Harrison Street Oakland CA 94612 510-482-4420 

x 261

510-482-4421 bkundu@energy-solution.com


bkundu@gmail.com

McElveen, Robbie Development Engineer Baldor Electric Company 6040 Ponders Court Greenville SC 29615 N/A N/A rfmcelveen@baldor.com

Moore, Douglas President Kentucky Service Co Inc. 2328 Maggard Drive Lexington KY 40511 N/A N/A doug@kyservice.com

Ni, Chun Chun Senior Research 

Associate

Lawrence Berkeley National 

Laboratory (LBNL)

1 Cyclotron Road, 

MS:90R4000

Berkeley CA 94720-8136 N/A N/A cni@lbl.gov

Sands, Derek Associate Editor Platts Inside Energy 1200 G Street NW Washington DC 20005 202-383-2241 N/A derek_sands@platts.com

Strong, Zolaikha Director

Sustainable Electrical 

Energy

Copper Development Association 12408 Washington Brice 

Road

Fairfax DC 22033 202-558-7625

212-251-7238

202-380-9085 zstrong@cda.copper.org

Towsley, Greg Director Regulatory and 

Technical Affairs

Grundfos Pumps Corporation 17100 West 118th Terrace Olathe KS 66061-6593 913-227-3414 559-346-6414 gtowsley@grundfos.com
#### George P. JOYCE, Appellant, v. P. G. C. CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 71-59.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 11, 1971.

Melvin Boyd of Ralph & Boyd, Miami, for appellant.

Paul B. Anton of Abrams, Anton, Robbins, Resnick & Burke, Hollywood, for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff Joyce brought an action for specific performance of a contract to convey real property. His claim was based on an option to purchase present in a lease allegedly assigned to him.

Judgment on the pleadings and summary judgment were awarded in defendant’s favor. Upon examining the record and briefs we find material, genuine issues of fact and law existed. Therefore, we reverse and remand.

A survey of the record reveals at least these issues of fact which must be determined on remand and the existence of which prohibited the entry of the instant summary judgment as a matter of law:

1. Was there a valid assignment of the lease to plaintiff? In other words, was consent to the assignment unreasonably withheld ?

2. Was there a valid assignment of the option to purchase in the lease? Generally, options to purchase are inseparable from the lease and are covenants running with the land. But there is an exception to this general rule. Where the option is inserted in the lease because personal confidence is reposed by the lessor in the lessee this consideration may be enough to remove the option as a covenant running with the land. Sisco v. Rotenberg, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 365; Rosello v. Hayden, Fla.1955, *79*So.2d 682; Markos v. Raimondi, Fla.App.1959, 108 So.2d 506. Whether this exception is applicable is a question of fact which must be more fully explored.

3. If there was a valid assignment of the lease, in that reasonable requirements for doing so were met, and if there was also a valid assignment of the option to purchase, the trier of fact must finally determine whether the reasonable requirements for consummating the actual purchase were met. This determination shall include an investigation into the possibility of any actions by plaintiff which may have constituted waiver.

We reverse and remand for a full trial consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

WALDEN and MAGER, JJ., and SACK, MARTIN, Associate Judge, concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF
                        FINANCIAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of Financial  Industries  Corporation
("FIC") on Form 10- Q/A for the quarter  ended June 30, 2003,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, George
M. Wise, III, Chief Financial  Officer,  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 and belief:

     (1)  The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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




    /s/ George M. Wise
_____________________________
George M. Wise, III
Chief Financial Officer
Date: December 23, 2003



                                     - 1 -
**Exhibit 31(a)**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, John C. Harris, President and Chief Executive Officer of Viseon, Inc.,certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Viseon, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;
(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and
(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls.
Date: September 28, 2004
/s/ John C.Harris
#### Robert John ERLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-1155.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 21, 1973.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; Raymond J. Hare, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.