alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Company sanitized

Does not contain Confidential Business

Information (CBI)

Appendix D



# Draft Facility Report on Product Content

## 2010/15 PFOA Stewardship Program



# Draft Facility Report on Product Content

I. CHEMICAL IDENTIFICATION

Identify the product (e.g fluoropolymer dispersion) for which you are submitting information:

Product name:___Fluorinated Surfactant(monomeric)_______

Product description (including concentrations of perfluoroalkyl chemicals

identified in Section IV below and year of production):

All products under the name of “Fluorinated Surfactant (monomeric)” are

considered to be precursors to PFOA and higher homologues.

II. COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Identify the company and location of the facility submitting information:

Company name:_AGC SEIMI CHEMICAL CO.,LTD

Site location:3-2-10, Chigasaki, Chigasaki City, Kanagawa,253-8585 Japan

:2276-2,Nada,Hirai,Kashima City,Ibaraki,314-0012 Japan

Identify a company technical contact who can respond to inquiries about the information

submitted:

Technical contact:_Shunji Odaka

Phone: _+81-467-82-4398____

Address: 3-2-10, Chigasaki, Chigasaki City, Kanagawa, 253-8585 Japan

III. PRODUCTION

Calendar year for which you are reporting: Jan 1, 2012 to Dec 31, 2012

(Normalized data based on year end run rate.)

Provide the amount of the product for the reporting year at each specific site:

Imported ___0 ____kgs/yr

Manufactured _CBI__ kgs/yr (As active ingredients)IV. PRODUCT CONTENT

A. CONCENTRATIONS OF RELEVANT PERFLUOROALKYL CHEMICALS

Please provide the concentrations (ppb) of various perfluoroalkyl chemicals in your product. For

chemicals for which you do not have actual data, please provide range estimates.

CBI

B. ANALYTICAL METHODS

Analyses should be conducted using the most accurate instrumentation and procedures available

as of the time of testing. Please provide detailed information on the methods used (including

analytical standards used, sampling, sample treatment, analysis), assumptions made, uncertainties

and detection limits (LOD, LOQ) for the data provided.

Active ingredients of the products and solvent/water compose commercial products.
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Apollo Acquisition Corporation (the "Company") for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph Rozelle, President 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, to the best of my knowledge that:





1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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 results of operations of the Company.








Date: November 23, 2010





/s/ Joseph RozelleJoseph Rozelle

President

(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)











The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Report pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Report for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filings of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
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



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Monroe
Capital Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Theodore L. Koenig, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
and I, Aaron D. Peck, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to our 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: May 12, 2014



| | /s/ Theodore
        L. Koenig                                                                                                                                                              
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Theodore L. Koenig
        Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
        and Director
        (Principal Executive Officer)                                                                     
| | Monroe Capital Corporation                                                                                                                                                                  
| |                                                                                                                                                                                             
| | /s/ Aaron D.
        Peck                                                                                                                                                                   
| | Aaron D. Peck
        Chief Financial Officer, Chief
        Investment Officer,
        Chief Compliance Officer, and Director
        (Principal Financial and Accounting
        Officer)
| | Monroe Capital Corporation
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 173 (Thursday, September 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 45298]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19277]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 10530]


In the Matter of the Designation of Jama'at Nusrat al-Islam wal-
Muslimin (JNIM), aka Jamaat Nosrat al-Islam wal-Mouslimin, aka Group 
for the Support of Islam and Muslims, aka Group to Support Islam and 
Muslims, aka GSIM, aka GNIM, aka Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen, as a 
Foreign Terrorist Organization Pursuant to Section 219 of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended

    Based upon a review of the Administrative Record assembled in this 
matter, and in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary 
of the Treasury, I conclude that there is a sufficient factual basis to 
find that the relevant circumstances described in section 219 of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (hereinafter ``INA'') (8 
U.S.C. 1189), exist with respect to Jama'at Nusrat al-Islam wal-
Muslimin (JNIM), also known as Jamaat Nosrat al-Islam wal-Mouslimin, 
also known as Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims, also known as 
Group to Support Islam and Muslims, also known as GSIM, also known as 
GNIM, also known as Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen.
    Therefore, I hereby designate the aforementioned organization and 
its aliases as a foreign terrorist organization pursuant to section 219 
of the INA.
    This determination shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: July 15, 2018.
Michael R. Pompeo,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2018-19277 Filed 9-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4710-AD-P
Andrew W. Bonney Senior Vice President of Planning 660 Barnstable Rd., Hyannis, MA 02601 Direct:508 862-9719 Fax:508 862-9791 Email: andrew.bonney@capeair.com

Kevin Schlemmer, Director EAS Program, U. S. Department ofTransportation 1200New Jersey Ave. SE Washington D.C. 20590 ,"-1' t' ~ ;-)

Reference DOT-OST-2000-7856
Dear Kevin, February 17,2014

Cape Air ishonored to be a robust partner for the US DOT inthe Essential Air Service Program. We are presently flying for 20 EAS communities and ridership in all is strong. As Cape Air's service for small communities seems to be working for the communities, the Department and our airline, over time we would like to pursue serving additional EAS communities. This letter isto infonn you that we are considering proposing service to some ofthe EAS communities inAlabama and Mississippi when next they come up forbid. We are confident that our fonnula ofhigh-frequency small-aircraft service will increase ridership and decrease the Department's per-passenger cost, as has happened at other EAS communities we serve. While we have atremendous amount ofhomework to do before pursuing aproposal, we envision the creation ofanew Cape Air EAS hublet at Memphis orNashville, based onthe model we have successfully expanded from Boston to St. Louis and Billings, MT.
One ofthe cities in which we are interested isMuscle Shoals, Alabama. We understand thatMuscle Shoals' traffic has declined recently from between 15,000 and 17,000 annual passengers to under 5,000 annual passengers. Based on our recent history inthe EAS program-and the strong fundamentals atMuscle Shoals-we believe that Cape Air service will likely be able to resurrect ridership. We hope your department will re-RFP Muscle Shoals.
Thank you for any consideration ofour interest inthis matter.
Bestregards,
----

Appeal brought on 9 February 2005 by Maurizio Turco against the judgment delivered on 23 November 2004 by the Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-84/03 between Maurizio Turco, supported by Republic of Finland, Kingdom of Denmark and Kingdom of Sweden and Council of the European Union, supported by United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-52/05 P)

(2005/C 106/28)

Language of procedure: English

An appeal against the judgment delivered on 23 November 2004 by the Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-84/03 (1) between Maurizio Turco, supported by Republic of Finland, Kingdom of Denmark and Kingdom of Sweden and Council of the European Union, supported by United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Commission of the European Communities, was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 9 February 2005 by Maurizio Turco, residing in Pulsano (Italy), represented by O. W. Brouwer and C. E. Schillemanns, lawyers,

The Appellant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The Appellant submits that the judgment of the Court of First Instance contains errors of law in its interpretation and application of Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (the Regulation).

The grounds of appeal and legal arguments on which the Appellant relies are that the Court of First Instance in the present case:

----

(1)OJ C 112, 10/05/2003, p. 38.

(2)OJ L 145, 31/05/2001, p. 43.

----
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18

- 150 V

Filed: April 17, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

DAPHNE DODSON

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine

Administration (SIRVA)

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA , for petitioner.

Jennifer Leigh Reynaud , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Dorsey

, Chief Special Master:

On January 31, 2018

, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. , 2 (the

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that that she suffered left shoulder injuries as a result

of her September 13, 2016 influenza ( “ flu ” ) vaccination . Petit ion at 1 . The case was

assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On April 16, 2019

, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that petitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent indicates that he

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This

means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine

Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the

disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasio n of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned

agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from

public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this

case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in

accordance with the E

- Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management

and Promotion of Electronic Government Services).

2 N ational Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

.has determined that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with a

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (“SIRVA”) that was

caused by the administration of petiti oner’s vaccination. Additionally, DICP

did not identify a ny other cause for petitioner’s shoulder injury, and the

medical records outlined above de monstrate that she suffered the residual

effects of her condition for more than six months. There fore, based on the

record as it now stands, petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for

compensation under the Vaccine Act. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 13(a)(1)(B);

42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 11(c) (1)(D)(i).

Id. at 4.

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the

undersigned find s that petitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4090 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4090

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
                coastwise trade for the vessel SEASCAPE.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 17, 1994

 Mr. McMillan introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
                coastwise trade for the vessel SEASCAPE.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the 
Act of June 19, 1886 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and section 12106 of title 
46, United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may issue a 
certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for 
employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel SEASCAPE (United 
States official number 941448).

                                 <all>
```
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Robert W. CHAPMAN, Appellee.

Nos. 72-937, 72-938 and 72-939.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 20, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-4304

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CRAIG JOE CRAWFORD,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Joseph Robert Goodwin,

District Judge. (CR-95-194)

Submitted: September 5, 1996 Decided: September 17, 1996

Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lawrence J. Lewis, FLESHER & LEWIS, Huntington, West Virginia, for

Appellant. Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Sharon M.

Frazier, Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Craig Joe Crawford appeals his conviction and sentence on a

guilty plea on a charge of knowingly and intentionally distributing

a quantity of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)

(1988). Crawford's attorney has filed a brief in accordance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), appealing the extent of

the sentencing court's downward departure from the Sentencing

Guidelines, but concluding that there are no meritorious grounds

for appeal. Crawford was notified of his right to file an additional brief, but failed to do so.

In accordance with the requirements of Anders, we have

examined the entire record and find no meritorious issues for

appeal. We find that Crawford's guideline range was properly

calculated pursuant to the United States Sentencing Commission,

Guidelines Manual. As such, the district judge's imposition of a

sentence within that range does not state an appealable question

under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3742 (West 1985 & Supp. 1996). See United

States v. Porter, 909 F.2d 789, 794 (4th Cir. 1990). Nor is the

extent of the district judge's downward departure from the guidelines appealable. See United States v. Hill, 70 F.3d 321, 323 (4th

Cir. 1995).

We deny without prejudice counsel's motion to withdraw at this

stage of the proceedings. This Court requires that counsel inform

his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court

of the United States for further review. If the client requests

that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition
3

would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this Court for leave

to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion must state that

a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
---

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, Sheryl Briscoe, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Degaro Innovations
      Corp. for the period ended April 30, 2011 (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 results of
      operations of Degaro Innovations Corp.                                                                 

Dated: July 28, 2011

| | /s/
      Sheryl Briscoe                                           
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Sheryl Briscoe                                                     
| | President, Secretary, Treasurer and Director                       
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal
      Financial Officer and
| | Principal Accounting Officer)                                      
| | Degaro Innovations Corp.                                           



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
  906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
  signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
  written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Degaro
  Innovations Corp. and will be retained by Degaro Innovations Corp. and furnished
  to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21
 
                    SUBSIDIARIES OF THE TIMES MIRROR COMPANY
 
                            AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998*
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                              STATE (OR COUNTRY)
                            NAME                               OF INCORPORATION
                            ----                              ------------------
<S>                                                           <C>
AchieveGlobal, Inc..........................................  Florida
The Baltimore Sun Company...................................  Maryland
Eagle New Media Investments, LLC**..........................  Delaware
Eagle Publishing Investments, LLC **........................  Delaware
E Z Buy & E Z Sell Recycler Corporation.....................  Delaware
The Hartford Courant Company................................  Connecticut
Jeppesen & Co., GmbH***.....................................  Germany
Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc.....................................  Delaware
The Morning Call, Inc.......................................  Pennsylvania
Newsday, Inc.***............................................  New York
The StayWell Company........................................  Delaware
Times Mirror Magazines, Inc. ***............................  New York
</TABLE>
 
---------------
  * The names of certain other subsidiaries have been omitted because,
    considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, they would not
    constitute a significant subsidiary. The Los Angeles Times is a division of
    The Times Mirror Company.
 
 ** Affiliates that are controlled by the Registrant as described in Note 4 to
    the consolidated financial statements.
 
*** 100% owned by a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant. (All other
    subsidiaries listed above are directly wholly-owned by the Registrant.)
 
                                       76