alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases Census 2000
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB01-CN.174 **Contact:**  Public Information Office						
301-457-3691/301-457-3620 (fax)
301- 457-1037 (TDD)
e-mail: 2000usa@census.gov							

Idabelle B. Hovland
301-457-8443

Julia Buckley-Ess
301-457-4033
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  TUESDAY, JULY 3, 2001 Census Bureau Releases Census  2000 Population Counts for Guam The U.S. Census Bureau today released the official Census 2000 population count of 154,805 for Guam. As part of Census 2000, the Census Bureau worked with the Guam government to collect detailed population and housing data. The count was provided to Guam Gov. Carl T.C. Gutierrez. Guam's population increased by 21,653 over the previous census in 1990. This represented a 16 percent increase in 10 years. The Census Bureau will provide more detailed data for Guam in a demographic profile scheduled for release later this year and in a separate summary file and printed report, scheduled for release in February 2002 and November 2002, respectively. The following table shows the final census counts for small geographic areas in Guam: ****2000 Final Population Totals**** **AREA**
  **POPULATION**
  **Change From Preceding Census****2000**
  **1990**
  **Number**
  **Percent**Guam
  154,805
  133,152
  21,653
  16%Agana Heights District
  3,940
  3,646
  294
  8%Agat District
  5,656
  4,960
  696
  14%Asan District
  2,090
  2,070
  20
  1%Barrigada District
  8,652
  8,846
  -194
  -2%Chalan Pago-Ordot District
  5,923
  4,451
  1,472
  33%Dededo District
  42,980
  31,728
  11,252
  35%Hagatña district
  1,100
  1,139
  -39
  -3%Inarajan District
  3,052
  2,469
  583
  24%Mangilao District
  13,313
  10,483
  2,830
  27%Merizo County
  2,163
  1,742
  421
  24%Mongmong-Toto-Maite District
  5,845
  5,845
  0
  0%Piti District
  1,666
  1,827
  -161
  -9%Santa Rita District
  7,500
  11,857
  -4,357
  -37%Sinajana District
  2,853
  2,658
  195
  7%Talofofo District
  3,215
  2,310
  905
  39%Tamuning District
  18,012
  16,673
  1,339
  8%Umatac District
  887
  897
  -10
  -1%Yigo District
  19,474
  14,213
  5,261
  37%Yona District
  6,484
  5,338
  1,146
  21%
  CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
Document Headings

                    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

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on July 25, 2018, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Node.js Foundation (“Node.js Foundation”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, SAP SE, Waldorf, GERMANY, has withdrawn as a party to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and Node.js Foundation intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On August 17, 2015, Node.js filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on September 28, 2015 (80 FR 58297).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on April 6, 2018. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on May 4, 2018 (83 FR 19836).                

Suzanne Morris,

Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics Unit, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2018-17277 Filed 8-10-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

    The reincorporation in Delaware and three for two stock split as described
in Note 12 to the financial statements has not been consummated at September 5,
2000. When it has been consummated, we will be in a position to furnish the
following consent:

    "We hereby consent to the use in the Prospectus constituting part of this
Registration Statement on Form S-1 of our report dated April 28, 2000, except as
to Note 12 which is as of           , 2000, relating to the financial statements
of International Microcircuits, Inc., which appears in such Prospectus. We also
consent to us under the heading "Experts" in such Prospectus."

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

San Jose, California
September   , 2000"
^:":'^DT,".T!P'I 

-. • •.'ilinliUrl 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of Hearings 

Washington, D.C. 

RECEIVED 

A;'^R - ^ 2010 

HEARING DOCKET 

IN THE MATTER OF 

Rushmore Helicopters, Inc. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP 10GL0002 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

EIR2009-GL-27-0021 

DMS No. FAA - 2010 0023 

Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin 

ANSWER 

COMES NOW Rushmore Helicopters, hic. (Rushmore), by and through its undersigned 

officer, and hereby makes its Answer to Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Complaint: 

1. Rushmore admits the allegation contained in Part I, Paragraphs 1 with the 

exception that the aircraft was being operated by the pilot near Keystone, SD and not Custer. 

2. Rushmore admits the allegations contained in Part I, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the 

FAA's Complaint. 

2. Rushmore denies Part I, Paragraphs 7, 9, and 10 of the FAA's Complaint. 

Rushmore further asserts that at least one flight was conducted with the knowledge and consent 

of the FAA inspectors on site. 

3. Rushmore is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny Part I, 

Paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 8 and therefore denies all of the same. 
Rushmore Helicopters, Inc. 

Page 2 of 3 

4. Rushmore denies Part II, Paragraphs 1 and 2 and asserts that it is not subject to 

any penalty herein. Further asserts, upon information and belief, that the FAA has already 

proceeded in this matter against Rushmore's pilot in command of the subject aircraft on the 

alleged violation date and the proceedings against the pilot in conmiand are concluded. 

Rushmore respectfully requests the Complaint be dismissed. 

Dated this _/ day of April, 2010. 

Rushmore Heli^pted, Inc. 

Michael ff. JacoK President 

24564 HvVl^385 

Custer, SD 57730 

Certiflcate of Service 

I hereby certify that the fortgomg ANSWER has been mailed and/or faxed (as indicated 

below) this / <«—-day of April, 2010, by the undersigned to the following: 

Original and One Copy (Expedited Mail): 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue SW 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

One Copy (Mailed And Faxed): 

Mr. Chris G. Zurales, Esq. 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Great Lakes Region, AGL-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2300 East Devon Avenue 

Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696 

TEL: 847-294-7713 

FAX: 847-294-7498 
Answer 

Rushmore Helicopters, Inc. 

Page 3 of 3 

One Copy (Mailed And Faxed): 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney - Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Dated this _l day of April, 2010. 

Rushmore Heli 

Michael J. Jacob, 

24564 HwyW?S5 

Custer, SD 57730 

tjiik .
**Exhibit 31.1**

**Certifications**

I, Paul J.B.Murphy, III, certify that:

1.             I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of New World Restaurant Group, Inc.;

2.             Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.             Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.             The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a)            Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

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

c)            Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.             The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

a)            All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b)           Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| Dated: November 10, 2006 | By: /s/ PAUL J. B. MURPHY, III |   |
|--------------------------|--------------------------------|--------|
|                     | Paul J.B. Murphy, III          |
|                     | Chief Executive Officer        |

 

----
260 La. 131

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Tommy WALDON v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 51973.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 13, 1971.

In re: Tommy Waldon applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and habeas corpus.

Writs refused. The showing made does not warrant the exercise of our original or supervisory jurisdiction.
#### COMMERCIAL CARRIER CORPORATION et al., Petitioners, v. James Gloss THOMPSON, Sr., et al., Respondents.

No. 44512.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 9, 1973.

Certiorari dismissed.
# C_2011367EN.01000901.xml

| 16.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 367/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 367/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6434 — Teekay/Marubeni/Maersk LNG)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 367/04

On 12 December 2011, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M6434. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M6434. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
#### FLORIDA DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION v. DICKINSON.

No. 39292.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1970.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 229 So.2d 6.
#### CECIL HOLLAND FORD, INC., a Florida corporation, d/b/a Ed Morse Ford, Appellant, v. PAN AMERICAN TIRE COMPANY, a corporation, Appellee.

No. 69-773.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Nov. 20, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
# Use of Defoamer Formulation

Part II, Section B

- Industrial Sites controlled by others

In its use as a defoamer, it is expected that the PMN S ubstance will be contained in the white

water system in paper mills. Most of the white water is re

- circulated for reuse. Any water not re

circulated is evaporated in the dryer section of the paper mill. After drying, i t is estimated that ~6 ppm of the notifiable substance will remain in the finished paper. Effluent is expected to be
t reated through primary and secondary wastewa ter treatment plant technology. The notifiable substance is expected to biodegrade during waste water treatment, and is not expected to be present in any effluent. Release to the environment is not expected duri ng normal use and handling. The notifiable substance is not expected to be present in any fugitive emissions.

Schematic diagram



# Bulk tank car to paper mill Storage Tank

Use of product to make paper Paper shipment to

customers A

- Cleaning tank car 1

- Controlled release cleaning tank car B

- Unloading into Storage Tank C

- Sampling & ana lyzing D

– Cleaning Storage Tank 2

- Controlled release from cleaning storage tank

3

- Controlled release of effluent to primary and secondary wastewater treatment plant technologyWorker activities (lettered on schematic)

Letter or activity from above Max # workers exposed per site Duration of
exposure (Hr) Protective equipment engineering controls/% PMN % PMN as used in operation

A

- Cleaning tank

car 1 1 hr/day,
every 30 days Safety glasses, chemical resistant gloves 2 %

B

- unloading truck into storage
t ank 2 0.5 hr/day, every 30 days Safety glasses, chemical resistant gloves 2 %

C

- Sampling & analyzing 2 0.5 hr/day, every 30 days Safety glasses, chemical resistant gloves 2%

D

- cleaning storage tank 3 4 hrs each,
every three
years Safety glasses, chemical resistant gloves 2%Environmental release (number on schematic)

Release number Amt. of PMN released Media of release and control technology 1

- Cleaning tank truck 4 kg (heel) Waste water containing residual PMN sent to on

site waste water treatment plant 2

- Cleaning storage tank 4 kg Waste water containing residual PMN sent to on

site waste water treatment plant 3

- Effluent unknown Waste water containing residual PMN sent to on

site waste water treatment plant
#### Barbara M. Lenz HAYDEN, Appellant, v. Francis D. CIPOLATO, et al., Appellees.

No. 72-605.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 19, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 11

- 00035

- CV

IN RE JEROME WALL RELATOR

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

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

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of

the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of

mandamus is denied.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and WALKER, J.

DELIVERED: March 3 , 2011

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8 (d).
##### 



Exhibit 10.2
 AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO
AMENDED AND RESTATED LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT
  Preliminary Statements
     Consent




---



##### 



Amendments to Amended and Restated Loan Agreement
 Attachment 1
 Exhibit A Attachment 2
  Amendment No. 5 Closing Date
    -2-




---



##### 



Exhibit B
  Section 2(d) plus plus plus plus
  -3-




---



##### 



Representations and Warranties
     Conditions to Effectiveness
 -4-




---



##### 



Exhibit A
    Miscellaneous
 No Novation
 Severability
 Ratification
 Choice of Law
 Signature Page Follows
 -5-




---



##### 



LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, 
as Agent and the sole existing LenderBy
    /s/ Andrew J. HeinzIts
    First Vice PresidentAPAC CUSTOMER SERVICES, INC.,
as BorrowerBy
    /s/ Robert J. KellerIts
President and C.E.O.
EXHIBIT 23

           
                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



The Board of Directors
DDL Electronics, Inc.


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration 
Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-02969 and 333-31349) and the 
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-74400 and 333-08689) of DDL 
Electronics, Inc. of our report dated August 21, 1998, relating to the 
consolidated balance sheets of DDL Electronics, Inc. and subsidiaries as 
of June 30, 1998 and 1997 and the related consolidated statements of 
operations, cash flows and stockholders' equity (deficit) for each of 
the years in the three-year period ended June 30, 1998, which report 
appears in the June 30, 1998 Annual Report on Form 10-K of DDL 
Electronics, Inc.




/s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Los Angeles, California
August 27, 1998
Exhibit 32.1
 
 Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(18 U.S.C. 1350)
  In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Century Aluminum Company (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Logan W. Kruger, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Michael A. Bless, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:
 
 1.
This 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 /s/ Logan W. Kruger


/s/ Michael A. BlessBy:
Logan W. Kruger

By:
Michael A. BlessTitle:
Chief Executive Officer

Title:
Chief Financial OfficerDate:
August 9, 2010

Date:
August 9, 2010
  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of APAC Customer Services, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact 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 present in 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(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in 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, including its 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 the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent 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(s) and I have disclosed, 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 in the 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;
andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: November 9, 2007
    /s/ George H. Hepburn IIIGeorge H. Hepburn IIISenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer