alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
BASF Corporation 

26 Davis Drive 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 

Tel: (800) 669-1770 

www.basf.com/usa Helping Make Products BetterTM

February 11, 2011 

Mr. James Parker 

Document Processing Desk 

Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (PRD) 

Office of Pesticide Programs (7504P) 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Room S-4900, One Potomac Yard 

2777 South Crystal Drive 

Arlington, VA 22202-4501 

Subject: Sethoxydim RED 

 Extension Request for Safflower Residue Study

Dear Mr. Parker, 

On behalf of BASF Corporation I am requesting an extension through December 31, 2011 for 

the submission of a residue study on safflower that was required by the sethoxydim RED. This 

study was conducted by IR-4 on behalf of BASF. While the actual study is completed, the 

analytical work, write-up, QA, and finalization of the study are not. It is anticipated that IR-4 will 

provide BASF with a final study by the end of November 2011. Once received, I will submit this 

study to EPA. 

If you have any questions concerning this request or need further information, please contact 

me directly at (919) 547-2282, or by e-mail at: amy.s.dugger-ronyak@basf.com. 

Best regards, 

BASF Corporation - Agricultural Solutions 

Amy Dugger-Ronyak 

Product Registration Manager 

Agricultural Solutions
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD ANN ARBOR, MI 48105

July 30, 2014
OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Summary of Communications with External P arties Regarding the Final Rule for

Emergency Vehicles and SCR Maintenance

FROM: Matthew W. Spears, Office of Transportation a nd Air Quality

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-1032

This memo documents various meetings and telephone calls held separately between Matthew Spears, EPA staff and external stakeholders, related to the rulemaking for emergency vehicles and SCR maintenance. The table below summarizes each such m eeting or phone call with interested parties related to this rule that occurred between the time of proposal and adoption of the final rule.

In addition to the meetings and telephone calls det ailed below, I also periodically updated Mike Carte r at the California Air Resources Board regarding the timing of the final rulemaking.

Date Participants Summary

6/6/13 Jed Mandel Telephone call: discuss and clarify EMA comments to the proposal.

6/21/13 Jed Mandel, Chris Riley, Rey

Agama, Rick Bishop Meeting: discuss and clarify EMA comments to the proposal, focus on stationary engines.

7/30/13 Jed Mandel Telephone call: discuss and clarify EMA comments to the proposal.
8/5/13 Jed Mandel, Melanie King Telephone call: discuss and clarify EMA comments to the proposal, focus on stationary engines.

8/20/13 Jed Mandel Telephone call: discuss and clarify EMA comments to the proposal.

9/4/13 Jed Mandel Telephone call: discuss and clarify EMA supplemental written comments to the proposal.

1/30/13 Jed Mandel Telephone call: discuss and clarify EMA supplemental written comments to the proposal.

4/10/13 Jed Mandel Telephone call: discuss and clarify EMA supplemental written comments to the proposal, focus on dual certification.

5/19/13 Jed Mandel Telephone call: discuss and clarify EMA supplemental written comments to the proposal, focus on dual certification.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-30022 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. HECTOR BARRAGAN-ESPINO, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:08-CR-121-1
Before SMITH, GARZA, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Hector Barragan-Espino (Barragan) appeals from the three-year term of supervised release imposed by the district c o urt in addition to his 24-month prison sentence following his conviction for illegal reentry. He does not contest th e c oncurrent 300-month term of imprisonment and eight-year term of supervised release imposed as a result of his conviction of possession with intent to distribute a substance containing methamphetamine. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f Ap p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Novembe r 3, 2 011 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court hasd ete rm inedthat thisop inion sho uld not * be publish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d circum st ance s se t forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-30022 Document: 00511654263 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/03/2011No. 11-30022

Although Barragan contends that we should review under a de novo standard, his failure to object in the district court warrants plain error review. United States v. Williams, 602 F.3d 313, 318-19 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 131 S. Ct. 597 (2010). To show plain error, the appellant must show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. Puck e tt v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 129 S. Ct. 1423, 1429 (2009). If the appellant makes such

a showing, this court may correct the error if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id. As the government concedes, the district court committe d e rror that is clear or obvious because the maximum term of supervised release applicable to Barragan’s 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) conviction is one year. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3581(b)(5) and 3583(b)(3). Although the government ar gu e s that Barragan fails to show that his substantial rights have been violated or that the error affected the fairness of the proceedings, we have taken “a generally permissive approach to both the prejudice and fairness prongs of plain error review.” Williams , 602 F.3d

at 319 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). This court o n s eve r al occasions has held that a sentence which exceeds the statutory maxi mum
c onstitutes plain error, and we reach the same conclusion here. See Wil l i a m s , 602 F.3d at 319-20; United States v. Rojas-Luna , 522 F.3d 502, 506-07 (5th Cir. 2008); United States v. Moreci , 283 F.3d 293, 300 (5th Cir. 200 2). Because Barragan faces a greater concurrent term of supervised release

on his drug conviction such that a modification does not affect the overall terms of his supervised release, we M O D I FY Barragan’s sentence on his § 1326(a)

c o nviction to reflect a one-year term of supervised release and AFFIRM his sentence as modified.

2 Case: 11-30022 Document: 00511654263 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/03/2011
# Official Journal L 9/2018

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 9 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6112 January 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 9

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6112 January 2018

---

| Contents | | I   Legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Definitive adoption (EU, Euratom) 2017/30 of amending budget No 5 of the European Union for the financial year 2017 | 1 |

Contents

I   Legislative acts

page

Definitive adoption (EU, Euratom) 2017/30 of amending budget No 5 of the European Union for the financial year 2017

1

All amounts in this budget document are expressed in euro unless otherwise indicated.

Any revenue provided for in Article 21(2) and (3) of the Financial Regulation, entered in Titles 5 and 6 of the statement of revenue, may lead to additional appropriations being entered on the headings which bore the initial expenditure giving rise to the corresponding revenue.

Figures for outturn refer to all authorised appropriations, including budget appropriations, additional appropriations and earmarked revenue.

Budgetary remarks are only executable insofar as they do not modify or extend the scope of an existing legal base, impinge on the administrative autonomy of institutions and can be covered by available resources (as indicated in the annex to the executability letter dated 28 October 2015).

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
----

**EXHIBIT        32.2**

**SECTION        1350 CERTIFICATION**

**OF        THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

|   | (1) | the                  Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of the Company for the three months                  ended                  March 31, 2006 (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. |
|--|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rafael Palacios, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered on January 11, 1989, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree *165and sentencing defendant to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of seven years to life, unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. *(People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302, 305.)

Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms.” *(People v Felman,*141 AD2d 889, 890, *lv denied*72 NY2d 918.) Concur—Murphy, P. J., Wallach, Asch, Kassal and Smith, JJ.
----

**EXHIBIT        32.2**

**SECTION        1350 CERTIFICATION**

**OF        THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

|   | (1) | the                  Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months                  ended                  March 31, 2006 (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. |
|--|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1664 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to modify the appointment and 

grade of the Chief of the Army Medical Specialist Corps. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2009 

Mr. JOHNSON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to modify the appointment and grade of the Chief of the Army Medical 

Specialist Corps. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. APPOINTMENT AND GRADE OF CHIEF OF THE 

4 ARMY MEDICAL SPECIALIST CORPS. 

5 Section 3070(b) of title 10, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘captain’’ 

8 and inserting ‘‘lieutenant colonel’’; and 

9 (2) by inserting after the first sentence the fol10 lowing new sentence: ‘‘An appointee who holds a 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1664 IS

1 lower regular grade shall be appointed in the regular 

2 grade of major general.’’. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 8, 2011 

0228 

Order 

 

March 8, 2011 

141942 & (37) 

ERICK V. BROWN, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v SC: 141942 

 COA: 297413 

Ingham CC: 09-000877-AA 

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the motion for miscellaneous relief is GRANTED. The 

application for leave to appeal the August 17, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is 

considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented 

should be reviewed by this Court.
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 Fresh Harvest Products, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended July 31, 2009 (the Report), the undersigned, Michael Jordan Friedman, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,  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 his knowledge:

|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 results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Michael Jordan Friedman

_________________________________________

Michael Jordan Friedman,

Chief Executive Officer And Chief Financial Officer



Date: September 21, 2009
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Carlos M. Enchavtegui, Appellant. We Transport, Inc., Respondent. Thomas F. Hartnett, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 29, 1989, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant lost his job as a mechanic after being absent for four successive days. Although the employer may have known that claimant was to be absent one or two of those days, claimant failed to call in and timely inform his supervisor of his continued absence. Claimant, who had a history of lateness and absenteeism, admitted that he had been counseled about the employer’s policy regarding punctuality and regular attendance. It has been held that unreported absences from work constitute misconduct warranting the employee’s disqualification from receiving unemployment insurance benefits *(see, Matter of Michelfelder [Ross]*80 AD2d 969; *Matter of Rossano [Levine]*52 AD2d 1006).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr. and Crew III, JJ., concur.
Second Department,

May, 1991

(May 1, 1991)

#### Marie Monteleone, Respondent, v Christopher Johnson et al., Defendants, and Southland Corporation, Appel*430lant.

In an action to recover damages pursuant to General Obligations Law §§ 11-100 and 11-101, the defendant South-land Corporation appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Molloy, J.), dated September 28, 1989, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as it is asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.

The evidence including the deposition testimony of the only survivor of a one-car collision, indicates that the plaintiffs decedent died upon an impact which occurred within seconds after the car left the road. Since the plaintiff did not dispute before Supreme Court the immediacy of the death, and seeks recovery only for his decedent’s conscious pain and suffering, and since the record demonstrates there was none, the motion for summary judgment should have been granted *(see, Scheu v High-Forest Corp.,*129 AD2d 366; *cf., Wittman v Gilson,*120 AD2d 964, *affd*70 NY2d 970; *Anderson v Rowe,*73 AD2d 1030). Brown, J. P., Kunzeman, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION

I, Kelly Tucek, Vice President, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Inland Land Appreciation Fund II, L.P.;
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 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 we have:

> 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;
> 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; and
> 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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

1. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

> all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
> 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.

By: Inland Real Estate Investment Corporation
    General Partner

/S/ Kelly Tucek

Name: Kelly Tucek
Title: Vice President of the General Partner and
          principal financial officer of Inland Land Appreciation Fund II, L.P.
Date: March 26, 2004
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*ALEX KELLY

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court (AC 17823) is denied.

CALLAHAN, C. J., and BORDEN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

*927
      *Hope C. Seeley,*in support of the petition.

*Susan C. Marks,*supervisory assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided April 15, 1998
# L_2006196EN.01002601.xml

| 18.7.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 196/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 196/26

---

Corrigendum to Commission Decision of 5 July 2006 recognising certain third countries and certain areas of third countries as being free from Xanthomonas campestris (all strains pathogenic to Citrus), Cercospora angolensis Carv. et Mendes and Guignardia citricarpa Kiely (all strains pathogenic to Citrus)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 187 of 8 July 2006
  )

On page 35, in the title,

for:

‘(2006/000/EC)’

read:

‘(2006/473/EC)’

---
**Exhibit
          32.2** ****




Certification
        Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
§1350)
 
 I,
        Micael
        A. Reisner, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal
        Financial and Accounting Officer) of ICON Capital Corp., the General Partner
        of
        the Registrant in connection with the Annual Report of ICON Cash Flow Partners
        L.P. Seven (the "Partnership") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
        2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
        (the "Annual Report") certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
        Act
        of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
 
 1.  The
        Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
        of
        the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78m); and
 
 2.  The
        information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Partnership.
 
 
 *Dated:
        April 2, 2007*
 
 */s/
          Michael A. Reisner*
 Michael
          A. Reisner
 Executive
          Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
 (Principal
          Financial and Accounting Officer)
 ICON
        Capital Corp.
 General
        Partner of ICON Cash Flow Partners L.P. Seven