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



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007 of
Belden & Blake Corporation;
 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 have:
    5.
    
    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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date: August 10, 2007
    
    By:
    
    /s/ James M. Vanderhider
James
M. Vanderhider, President, Chief
Financial Officer and Director
# C_2019295EN.01000202.xml

| 2.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/2

---

Appeal brought on 19 December 2018 by Haskovo Chamber of Commerce and Industry against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 25 October 2018 in Case T-122/17: Devin v EUIPO — Haskovo

(Case C-800/18 P)

(2019/C 295/03)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Haskovo Chamber of Commerce and Industry (represented by: I. Pakidanska and D. Dimitrova, advokati)

Other parties to the proceedings: Devin AD, European Union Intellectual Property Office

By order of 11 July 2019 the Court of Justice (Ninth Chamber) held that the appeal is dismissed as in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded and that Haskovo Chamber of Commerce and Industry shall bear its own costs.

---
July 17, 2000

22836

#### Animal Haven, Inc. v. Hawaiian Humane Soc.

Affirmed
#### Spangler v. Pacific Ins. Co., Ltd.

17403

03/30/1999

Vacated and Remanded
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-14-00012-CV

IN RE: FREESTONE UNDERGROUND STORAGE, INC., RAY FUNDERBURK, AND 

NANCY FUNDERBURK

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.
2

O RDER

On February 3, 2014, Freestone Underground Storage, Inc., Ray Funderburk, and Nancy 

Funderburk, Relators, filed a petition for writ of mandamus. Contemporaneously, Relators filed 

a motion requesting that this Court stay any and all underlying proceedings pending this Court’s 

ruling on the petition for writ of mandamus.

After reviewing the petition and the motion for temporary relief, this Court is of the 

opinion that the temporary relief requested should be granted and that all proceedings and 

activities in the trial court should be stayed pending this Court’s ruling on the mandamus 

petition.

Now, therefore, it is ordered that all proceedings and activities concerning cause number 

2013-290 in the 123rd Judicial District Court of Panola County, Texas, are stayed pending this 

Court’s determination of Relators’ petition for writ of mandamus.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: February 19, 2014
#### State v. Campbell

17766

9/05/95

Affirmed
End User Tools Request links: Support Request (End User Tools) Mobile Device Request Training Request

Contact: WebGIS.Connect@usda.gov 

Last Updated: 27 January 2023 11:25 1 

Access Training Maps Job Aid

Users should take extreme care not to enter real data in a training map. 

Training maps are used for training and allow for free data entry of practice data. These maps are 

hosted in a separate environment from production, or official, data collection tools. 

All PPQ pest survey maps created by the End User Tools for nationwide use have a training version 

which is shared to the “PPQ EUT Training” group on the MRP Stage environment. Users can supply 

themselves access to these maps freely using the steps below.

You will need MRP Stage portal URL: https://maps-stg.mrp.usda.gov/arcgis/

eAuthentication Level 2 (Username and Password or PIV card if from a PC) 

A minimum portal user role of APHIS_Field_Worker

Steps to add your access From a web browser (not Internet Explorer), navigate to the MRP Stage portal. 

Enter your eAuthentication username and password (or choose PIV card) to sign in.

Click on the “Groups” button in the main menu at the top of the page. 

Then click the “My Organization’s Groups” button in the blue banner.

(See red boxes in Figure 1) 

In the “Search My Organization’s Groups” window, type “PPQ 

EUT Training” and hit Enter. Click on the title of the “PPQ EUT 

Training” group. (Figure 2) 

At the right side of the page, click the “Join this group” button. 

You should see a confirmation message briefly appear near 

the top of the page.

Click on the Content tab. Maps are listed alphabetically by title and a search bar allows the user to 

type in a portion of the title (i.e. the pest program abbreviation). (Figure 3) 

Figure 1. Groups and My Organization's Groups tabs

Figure 2. Type in PPQ EUT Training to locate

Figure 3. PPQ EUT Training Group: Content tab and Search bar
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-44490, 333-65738 and 333-67636 on Form S-8, and Registration Statement No.
333-84650 on Form S-3 of Magnum Hunter Resources, Inc. of our report dated March
25, 2003, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Magnum Hunter
Resources, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2002.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Dallas, Texas
March 31, 2003
<PAGE>

Exhibit 21. Subsidiaries of the Registrant


     The Company has two wholly-owned subsidiaries. All others listed are either
direct or indirect subsidiaries of the Bank.


SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY                  STATE OF INCORPORATION
---------------------------                  ----------------------

Mid America Bank, fsb                        United States
MAF Developments, Inc.                       Illinois



SUBSIDIARIES OF THE BANK                     STATE OF INCORPORATION
------------------------                     ----------------------

Mid America Investment Services, Inc.        Illinois
Mid America Insurance Agency, Inc.           Illinois
Mid America Finance Corporation              Illinois
Mid America Mortgage Securities, Inc.        Illinois
N.W. Financial Corporation                   Illinois
Ambria Development Corporation               Illinois
Randall Road Development Corporation         Illinois
Centre Point Title Services, Inc.            Illinois
Reigate Woods Development Corporation        Illinois
MAF Realty Co., L.L.C. - III                 Delaware
MAF Realty Co., L.L.C. - IV                  Delaware
APHIS-Approved Establishments to Export Pork-Filled Pasta 

Products from Italy

Establishment 

number: Name/address:

1549/L Barilla G. eR Fratelli SPA Via Mantova 166, Parma

03/2020 APHIS-Approved Establishments to Export Pork-Filled Pasta Products from Italy 1-1
```

[Federal Register: March 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 52)]
[Notices]               
[Page 13087-13088]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18mr10-46]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

 
Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 9 a.m.-12 Noon.

PLACE: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

STATUS: Commission Meeting--Open to the Public.

[[Page 13088]]


MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 1. Pending Decisional Matter: Bassinets--
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR)
    2. Definition of Children's Product--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPR)
    A live webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at http://www.cpsc.gov/webcast/index.html.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814 (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: March 16, 2010.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-6133 Filed 3-16-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
```
#### William E. Bishopp, Respondent, *v.*Bruce Cookinham, Appellant.

County Court, Oneida County,

May 25, 1959.

*Frank G. Pratt*and *Louis S. Gifarelli*for appellant.

*Gordon P. Jeffery*for respondent.

Johh J. Walsh, J.

This is a motion to dismiss an appeal in a civil action on the ground that the notice of appeal was not filed within 20 days (Justice Court Act, § 428).

*886There is no dispute about the fact that the notice of appeal was not filed within the 20 days allowed by statute.

The courts have demanded a strict adherence to the requirements of section 428 of the Justice Court Act. *(Bennett*v. *Cole, 173*App. Div. 521; *Ganges Bros., Inc.,*v. *Specht,*241 App. Div. 737; *Ellias*v. *Thomas Furniture Works,*125 Misc. 683; *Kemack*v. *Coon,*143 Misc. 25; *Bieser*v. *Weiner,*144 Misc. 94; *Van Orsdale*v. *Genesee Val. Garage,*150 Misc. 655; *Szoth*v. *Green,*155 Misc. 210 [Oneida County Ct., Hanagan, J.].)

The defendant-appellant claims that the appeal was timely because the Justice advised defendant-appellant after the trial that he had 30 days in which to appeal. Even if this contention is true, neither the Justice below nor the appellate court has any power to extend the statutory time within which a party may perfect his appeal. *(Clark*v. *Harder,*22 N. Y. S. 2d 395 [1940]; *Thomas*v. *Thomas,*18 Hun 481; *Wait*v. *Van Allen,*22 N. Y. 319.) The power to extend the time to appeal is limited to a deceased litigant (see Justice Court Act, § 429).

Defendant-appellant relies on *Bagley*v. *Jennings*(58 Hun 56, 59). In that case, the court said: *“*The County Court has full power and jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals on their merits, and while neither the court or a party, *without the consent of the other,*can extend the time to appeal prescribed by statute, yet, *where they stipulate an extension,*they simply determine between themselves the time when the controversy should be submitted to the appellate court, and the statute in no way abridges the power of the parties to extend the time by stipulation.” (Italics supplied.)

Defendant-appellant claims that the attorney for plaintiff at the same time that the Justice informed him that he had 30 days in which to appeal, likewise informed the defendant-appellant that he had 30 days in which to appeal. Plaintiff’s attorney filed an affidavit in which he denied any such conversation. In this respect he also filed affidavits from William Bishopp, the plaintiff, Charlotte Bishopp and one James H. Simons who were present at the time of the trial which substantiated his denial.

Without resolving the conflict between the affidavits of the opposing parties, this court cannot view any such statement even if made as a stipulation extending the time to appeal. A stipulation, like any other agreement requires a ‘ ‘ meeting of the minds ”. No such situation can be deduced from the single statement alleged to have been made. 1

Motion to dismiss the appeal must be granted.
#### State v. Sanchez

17724

8/26/96

Denied

82 Hawai'i 517, 923 P.2d 934
December 2, 2011 

MEMORANDUM 

From: William H. Maxwell 

EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01) 

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 

Subject: Meeting with Salt River Project (SRP) 

Attendees: 

See attached. 

Discussion: 

A general discussion was held of the proposed Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS).
February 16, 2010 

Dorothy Beard 

Chief, Docket Branch 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Re: 	 Joint Applicants' Confidential Responses to 

Interrogatories, American/Japan Airlines 

Antitrust Immunity, DOT-OST-2010-0034 

Dear 	Ms. Beard: 

American Airlines, Inc. and Japan Airlines International Co., Ltd. hereby submit the confidential version of the 

February 16, 2010 Responses to Interrogatories. We request 

confidential treatment of this document in accordance with our 

Rule 12 motion of February 12, 2010, which we incorporate herein 

by reference. 

Respectfully submitted, 

WILLIAM KARAS 

CAROL GOSAIN 

Steptoe & Johnson LLP 

1330 Connecticut Ave., N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20036 

(202) 429-6223 

wkaras@steptoe.com 

cgosain@steptoe.com 

Counsel for Japan Airlines 

cc: 	 Todd Homan 

Peter Irvine 

Keith Glatz 

Service list 

CARL B. NELSON,'JR. 

Associate General Counsel 

American Airlines, Inc. 

1101 17th Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20036 

(202) 496-5647 

carl.nelson@aa.com 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing 

document by email on the following persons: 

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com 

scott.mcclain@delta.com 

sametta.c.barnett@delta.com 

kquinn@pillsburywinthrop.com 

bkeiner@crowell.com 

mrosia@crowell.com 

bruce.rabinovitz@wilmerhale.com 

jeffrey.manley@united.com 

bob.kneisley@wnco.com 

robert.land@jetblue.com 

msinick@ssd.com 

cdonley@ssd.com 

anbird@fedex.com 

dvaughan@kelleydrye.com 

kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.com 

jrichardson@johnlrichardson.com 

lhalloway@crowell.com 

efaberman@wileyrein.com 

mroller@rollerbauer.com 

howard.kass@usairways.com 

benjamin.slocum@usairways.com 

sophy.chen@hklaw.com 

February 16, 2010 

jhill@dlalaw.com 

bill@mietuslaw.com 

mgoldman@sgbdc.com 

rsilverberg@sgbdc.com 

dhainbach@ggh-airlaw.com 

mcmillin@woa.com 

mchopra@jamhoff.com 

russell.bailey@alpa.org 

dkirstein@yklaw.com 

jyoung@yklaw.com 

donna.kooperstein@usdoj.gov 

dwight.moore@ustranscom.mil 

jim.ballough@faa.gov 

byerlyjr@state.gov 

recohn@hhlaw.com 

cjsimpson@zsrlaw.com 

pmurphy@lopmurphy.com 

lachter@starpower.net 

anita.mosner@hklaw.com 

rpommer@atlasair.com 

gmurphy@crowell.com
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 November 20, 2013

p1113

Order 

Clerk

November 20, 2013

146797

MAUREEN POLANIA,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v SC: 146797

COA: 308593

Ingham CC: 11-000742-CZ

STATE EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT

BOARD,

Respondent-Appellee.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 29, 2013 

judgment 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.
Learn more: www.aphis.usda.gov/animalwelfare/aids 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Animal Care

AC-21-004 • Issued May 2021

Intestinal Parasites in Dogs 

Worms and other intestinal parasites live at the expense of the 

infected animal. They dwell in the digestive tract, feeding on the 

dog’s nutrients and causing serious health problems. Routine testing 

is the only reliable way to detect them.

How Do Dogs Get Intestinal Parasites? 

Dogs pick up intestinal parasites by 

ingesting the parasite or its eggs in 

contaminated food or water or after 

licking surfaces or objects that have been 

contaminated with feces from an infected 

animal. They will then spread the parasite 

to other dogs in their own feces. Puppies 

can also get parasites from their mother’s 

milk or even while still in the womb. 

Dogs can spread parasites without any 

signs of infection. If symptoms do appear, 

you may see: loose stool; diarrhea; blood 

in the stool; weight loss; an inability to gain 

weight; a dull, coarse coat; or in some 

cases, worms visible in the feces. 

Protect Your Dogs From Intestinal Parasites 

l Perform routine testing and deworming

l Promptly remove feces from housing areas, 

runs, and yards

l Properly clean and disinfect kennels on a 

regular basis

l Provide fresh, clean water 

l Avoid raw food diets 

Common Types 

TALK 

WITH YOUR 

VETERINARIAN 

about preventive 

care options and 

a schedule for 

parasite testing. 

DID YOU KNOW?

Parasites in 

apparently healthy 

dogs are often an 

ongoing source 

of reinfection and 

may spread to more 

vulnerable dogs, like 

puppies. That’s why 

routine testing and 

deworming are 

so important.

ROUNDWORMS HOOKWORMS WHIPWORMS TAPEWORMS GIARDIA COCCIDIA
Exhibit 31.6 

RULE13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION 

OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER 

(required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) 

I, Gary L. Rainwater, certify that: 

1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 of Central Illinois Light Company;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact 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; and 

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report. 

Date:  April 21, 2006
#### State v. Yonemura

22308

06/29/2000

Vacated & Remanded
Exhibit 23.2


                    CONSENT OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-1240), Form S-8
(No. 33-32519), Form S-8 (No. 333-50962) and Form S-3 (No. 333-56651) of
Financial Federal Corporation of our report dated August 31, 2000, included in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



/s/ EISNER & LUBIN LLP

New York, New York
October 29, 2001

                                       16
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-2652

___________________________ United States of America

Plaintiff Appellee

v. Rickey R. Norton, Jr. Defendant Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

____________ Submitted: March 19, 2020 Filed: March 24, 2020 [Unpublished]

____________ Before ERICKSON, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. Rickey Norton appeals after the district court 1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him to a prison term within the advisory range under Chapter 7 of the

1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“Guidelines”) and an additional term

of supervised release. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and argues the revocation sentence is substantively unreasonable. We conclude the revocation sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See United States v. McGhee , 869 F.3d 703, 705-06 (8th Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (revocation sentences are reviewed for abuse of discretion). The sentence was within the advisory Guidelines range and the statutory requirements. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), (h). Furthermore, the district court referenced the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and explained its reasons for the decision; and there is no indication the district court overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. See United States v. Feemster , 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (discussing substantive reasonableness; permitting, on appeal, presumption of reasonableness for Guidelines-range sentence). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

______________________________

-2-
Exhibit 21


                          KANEB PIPE LINE PARTNERS, L.P
                                 SUBSIDIARY LIST


    KANEB PIPE LINE PARTNERS. L.P.
        Kaneb Pipe Line Partners, L.P.
           Kaneb Pipe Line Operating Partnership, L.P.
               Shore Terminals LLC
               Statia Terminals Holding Company LLC
                  Statia Technology, Inc.
                  Statia Terminals International N.V.
                      Statia Terminals Corporation N.V.
                          Statia Terminals Canada Co.
                             Point Tupper Marine Services Co.
                          Statia Terminals Canada Partnership
                          Statia Terminals Canada Holdings Co.
                      Statia Terminals Antilles N.V.
                          Saba Trustcompany N.V.
                          Bicen Development Corporation N.V.
                          Statia Terminals N.V.
                             Statia Terminals Marine Services N.V.
                             Statia Tugs N.V.
                      Statia Terminals Delaware, Inc.
                          Statia Terminals, Inc.
                          Statia Terminals New Jersey, Inc.
                          Seven Seas Steamship Company, Inc.
                             Seven Seas Steamship Company (Sint Eustatius) N.V.
               Support Terminal Operating Partnership, L.P.
                  Kaneb Terminals Ltd
                      Kaneb Terminals (Eastham) Ltd.
                  ST Linden Terminal, LLC
                  ST/Center Chillicothe Terminal LLC
                  ST Australia Pty. Ltd.
                      Terminals Pty Ltd.
                  Kaneb Terminals Ltd.
                      Bulk Storage Terminals Limited
                      Kaneb Terminals (Auckland) Limited
               Support Terminal Services, Inc.
                  StanTrans, Inc.
                      StanTrans Holding, Inc.
                      StanTrans Partners, L.P.