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

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 47 (Friday, March 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 14409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5748]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Accreditation of Intertek USA, Inc., as a Commercial Laboratory

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of accreditation of Intertek USA, Inc., as a commercial 
laboratory.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12, 
Intertek USA, Inc., 15602 Jacintoport Blvd. Stolthaven Terminal, 
Houston, TX 77015, has been accredited to test petroleum, petroleum 
products, organic chemicals and vegetable oils for customs purposes, in 
accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12. Anyone wishing to 
employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses should request and 
receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited by the 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test 
requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test this 
entity is accredited to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be 
sent to [email protected]. Please reference the Web site listed below 
for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited 
laboratories.
    http://cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/trade/automated/labs_scientific_svcs/commercial_gaugers/gaulist.ctt/gaulist.pdf

DATES: The accreditation of Intertek USA, Inc., as commercial 
laboratory became effective on July 08, 2011. The next triennial 
inspection date will be scheduled for July 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mike McCormick, Laboratories and 
Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-
1060.

    Dated: February 29, 2012.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
[FR Doc. 2012-5748 Filed 3-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
```
My name is Nick Kerwin. I am 28 years old and I am deeply concerned about global warming. Man is

responsible for this warming. There is no debate, the science is in. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either lying or willfully ignorant. For the last two and a half year I have been living in Boulder, CO. Last September, my fiancé and I were under a mandatory evacuation during the 500 year flood. We were fortunate as we did not lose any property. My office did suffer extensive damage and our company was displaced until this past January. In the summer of 2012, we were under a voluntary evacuation due the fire burning on Flagstaff mountain. I consider my own experience, and I think back to the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy and Hurricane Katrina, and I have to ask is this the new normal? Are we going to have to deal with 50 year storms and 100 year floods every 5 years? In a decade will we be seeing biblical disasters every 2-3 years? Some people will site cost as a reason that we should not adopt these regulations, but can we really afford to do nothing? How much does it cost to recover from a 500 year flood? What is the cost to clean up a hurricane? We emit roughly a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases in this country. We bear a great responsibility to help mitigate the disastrous effects of global warming. As such, I would like to advocate that the EPA take a bolder position and INCREASE the targeted emissions reductions. We need bold action, and we need it NOW. In 2050 I will be 65 and I do not want to live in a world plagued by drought, floods, tornadoes and hurricanes. I want the privilege of retiring in a habitable country. I want to be able to have children and grandchildren and not worry about the world we are leaving them. Please set aside short term thinking, and do not give into the fossil fuel industry's moaning. We need a long term, bold plan that enables us to lead at home and abroad. Raise the bar. Increase the emissions reductions targets.

Thank you.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kathleen Gordineer, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by her motion, from an amended sentence of the County Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.), imposed July 30, 1986.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic.

The appellant has served her sentence, and, indeed, had served her sentence as of the date the appeal was perfected. Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Eiber, Rosenblatt and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **0 -**  **13 6**  **7**

In R e: KEITH DOUGLAS ROBINSON , P etitioner
.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
. ( 5 : 0 8

- c v - 0 0 068

- GCM )

Submitted : June 24 , 2010 Decided: June 29, 2010

Befor e DUNCAN, AGEE, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion
. Keith Douglas Robinson , Petitioner Pro Se
. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Keith Douglas Robinson petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking to challenge this court’s decision in Robinson v. Jackson , No. 08

- 7943 (4th Cir. Mar. 9, 2009) (unpublished)
. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United
States Dist. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976) ; United States v. Moussaoui , 333 F.3d 509, 516

- 17 (4th Cir. 2003) . Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and there are no adequate means to obtain that relief
. In re Braxton , 258 F.3d 250, 261 (4th Cir. 2001)
. Because mandamus is not the proper remedy for challenging a prior decision of this court, we de ny the petition . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequ ately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. PETITION DENIED
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of TAL International Group, Inc. (the ‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Brian M. Sondey, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|  |           |                                                                                                                            |
|--|-----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  | (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. |

Date: May 9, 2007

|        |  |  |                                                           |
|--------|--|--|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|   |  |  | /s/ Brian M. Sondey                                  |
|   |  |  | Brian M. SondeyPresident and Chief Executive Officer |
|        |

----
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1944 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Regent 800. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 28, 2009 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Regent 800. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REGENT 800. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4- 

(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4- 

[(trifluoromethyl)sulfinyl]- 

1H-pyrazole-3-carbonitrile 

(CAS No. 120068–37–3) 

(provided for in subheading 

3808.91.50) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1944 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
#### Le Sannom Building Corp., Appellant, v Helen E. Lassen et al., Defendants, and Peter Dudek et al., Respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Irma Vidal Santaella, J.), entered December 13, 1990, which *inter alia,*denied plaintiff’s motion to amend the caption to substitute certain named individuals for "John and Jane Doe”, denied the motion of defendants Dudek and Cromwell to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (4) and stayed plaintiff’s claims for use and occupancy of the subject premises, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of consolidating this action with the action captioned *Cromwell v Le Sannom Bldg. Corp.*(Index No. 21485/87) pending before Justice Myriam Altman, and amending the caption in this action to substitute as parties, Peter Dudek and Kathleen Cromwell for "John Doe and Jane Doe”, and otherwise affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Plaintiff is the landlord of the building located at 150 West *25046th Street, which has been issued an interim multiple dwelling registration number. Defendant Lassen entered into a written lease with the landlord. Lassen abandoned the leased premises after subletting the premises to Art Blakey, Jr., who, in turn, sublet a portion of the premises to defendants Dudek and Cromwell. The landlord brought this action to reenter the premises and retake possession on the grounds, *inter alia,*that the failure to pay rent is a breach of a substantial obligation of their lease constituting a nuisance.

It is conceded that Dudek and Cromwell occupy the premises. Thus, the caption should be amended accordingly.

Consolidation is permitted where actions involve a common question of law or fact. (CPLR 602.) Two other matters involving these premises and these defendants are pending before Justice Altman. While continuation of the stay in this matter is not warranted, the action should be joined with the other matters now pending before Justice Altman.

The tenants’ argument that they cannot be ejected because they are protected loft tenants under Multiple Dwelling Law article 7-C is without merit. While the article protects tenants from being ejected due to the lack of a residential certificate of occupancy, it does not preclude ejectment for non-payment of rent. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Ross, JJ.
GMAC

Commercial Mortgage

 

 

Management's Assertion Concerning Compliance

                                           With Minimum Servicing Standards

March 17, 2003

As of and for the year ended December 31, 2002, GMAC Commercial Mortgage 

Corporation has complied in all material respects, with the minimum servicing standards                  set forth in the company's minimum servicing standards (Exhibit A), which were derived               from the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation 
Program for Mortgage Bankers.

As of December 31, 2002, the company was covered by various General Motors

Corporation insurance policies providing for $400 million of fidelity bond insurance and
$400 million of errors and omissions insurance.

 
***Robert D. Feller

Robert D. Feller

Chief Executive Officer

 
***Wayne D.  Hoch

Wayne D.  Hoch

Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
***Michael I. Lipson

Michael I. Lipson

Executive Vice President, Global Servicing

 

200 Witmer Road P.O. Box 1015 Horsham, PA 19044 8015*********
SERVED MARCH 3, 2010 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

AIR EVAC, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP10CE0002 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0024 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2007CE030008) has been 

assigned to Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and 

other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA 

Hearing Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service List. 

lie A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative L ^ J 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP10CE0002 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Mr. Colin Collins, President and CEO 

Air Evac EMS, Inc., Respondent 

P.O. Box 768-306 Davis Drive 

West Plains, MO 65775 

James E. Ramsey, Respondent's Counsel 

Cooling & Herbers P.C. 

2400 City Center Square 

1100 Main Street 

Kansas City, MO 64105 

TEL: 816-474-0777 

FAX: 816-472-0790 

Mark G. Camacho, Complainant's Counsel 

Senior Enforcement Attorney 

Central Region, ACE-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

DOT Building 

901 Locust, Room 506 

Kansas City, MO 64106-2641 

TEL: 816-329-3765 

FAX: 816-329-3771 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-3 66-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 

2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
#### In the Matter of Duane Dixon, Petitioner, v Thomas A. Coughlin III, as Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner contends that the determination that he was guilty of violating prison rule 108.17 (unauthorized legal assistance) was not supported by substantial evidence. However, the misbehavior report, together with the affidavits found in petitioner’s cell and petitioner’s admission that he was providing unauthorized legal assistance, warrant a rejec*924tion of this contention *(see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith,*66 NY2d 130). His claim that the rule in question was unconstitutional is also without merit *(see, Johnson v Avery,*393 US 483; *Sostre v McGinnis,*442 F2d 178, 201, *cert denied sub nom. Sostre v Oswald,*404 US 1049, 405 US 978). As to petitioner’s remaining contentions, they have been considered and found either to have been unpreserved for review or lacking in merit.

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.
CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Kennedy Kerster, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Icon Development Inc. (the Company), hereby 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:



(i)

the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company, for the quarter  ended September 30, 2006, and to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and









(ii)

the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





By:

/s/Kennedy Kerster







Name:

Kennedy Kerster









Title:

Chief Executive Officer and Chief



Financial Officer









Date:

November 20, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-KSB to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-KB), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATIONS


PURSUANT
TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of The Amacore
Group, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge,
that:





The
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 (the
Form 10-KSB) of the Company fully complies with the requirement of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in
the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated:
      April 15, 2008
            /s/Clark A.  Marcus
              Clark A.
Marcus
              Chief Executive
      Officer








Dated:
      April 15, 2008
            /s/Giuseppe Crisafi
              Giuseppe
      Crisafi
              Chief Financial
      Officer
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00086-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.M.M., A CHILD

On Appeal from the

85th District Court of Brazos County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 19-000960-CV-85

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

October 21, 2021
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6529

JAMES K. RIDDICK,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District

Judge. (2:06-cv-00480-RAJ)

Submitted: September 19, 2007 Decided: October 9, 2007

Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James K. Riddick, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge Jeffrey, III,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

James K. Riddick seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended

that relief be denied and advised Riddick that failure to file

timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate

review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.

Despite this warning, Riddick failed to object to the magistrate

judge’s recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate

judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of

the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been

warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Wright v. Collins,

766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474

U.S. 140 (1985). Riddick has waived appellate review by failing to

timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to

proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. 

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.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTINGFIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by referencein the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-80871,33-98148, 33-98150, 333-129888 and 333-119829) of ProlianceInternational, Inc. (formerly known as Transpro, Inc.) of our reportdated March  17, 2004 except for Note 4, for which the date isJune  14,  2005, relating to the consolidated statements ofoperations, cash flows, and changes in stockholders’ equity forthe year ended December  31,  2003 and the financialstatement schedule for the year ended December  31,  2003,which appear in this Form 10-K.

/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLPHartford, CTMarch 30,2006

----