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

mailto:abshelpline@aphis.usda.gov?subject=AQI%20Quarterly%20Remittancemailto:ABSHelpline@usda.govmailto:ABSHelpline@aphis.usda.gov?subject=AQI%20Quarterly%20Remittancemailto:ABSHelpline@usda.gov.

# Refund Request Example

mailto:abshelpline@aphis.usda.gov?subject=AQI%20Quarterly%20Remittancemailto:ABSHelpline@usda.govmailto:ABSHelpline@aphis.usda.gov?subject=AQI%20Quarterly%20Remittancemailto:ABSHelpline@usda.gov.mailto:XYZAir@gmail.com

# Sheet3

# Sheet1

mailto:abshelpline@aphis.usda.gov?subject=AQI%20Quarterly%20Remittancemailto:ABSHelpline@usda.govmailto:ABSHelpline@aphis.usda.gov?subject=AQI%20Quarterly%20Remittancemailto:ABSHelpline@usda.gov.

# image1.jpeg
EX-32.2 CERTIFICATION OF CFO PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Annual Report of ECO2 Plastics, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Raymond M. Salomon,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), 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 result of operations of the Company.





By: /s/ Raymond M. Salomon


Raymond M. Salomon


Chief Financial Officer





September 14, 2009





[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to ECO2 Plastics, Inc. and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
# C_2021079EN.01002902.xml

| 8.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/29

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Jareš Procházková and Jareš v EUIPO — Elton Hodinářská (MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949)

(Case T-656/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949 - Absence of a prior right acquired pursuant to national law - Article 52(2)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/04 (now Article 60(2)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 79/38)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicants: Hana Jareš Procházková (Prague, Czech Republic), Antonín Jareš (Prague) (represented by: M. Kyjovský, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Elton Hodinářská a.s. (Nové Město nad Metují, Czech Republic) (represented by: T. Matoušek, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 September 2018 (Case R 1159/2017-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between, on the one hand, Mrs Jareš Procházková and Mr Jareš and, on the other hand, Elton Hodinářská.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mrs Hana Jareš Procházková and Mr Antonín Jareš to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mrs Hana Jareš Procházková and Mr Antonín Jareš to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

| 3. | Orders Elton Hodinářská a.s. to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Elton Hodinářská a.s. to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 4, 7.1.2019.

---
EXHIBIT 23


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  following  Registration
Statements  of  Cornerstone  Realty  Income  Trust,  Inc.  and  in  the  related
Prospectuses  of  our  report  dated  January  25,  1999,  with  respect  to the
consolidated  financial  statements  and schedule of  Cornerstone  Realty Income
Trust,  Inc.  included  in this Annual  Report  (Form  10-K) for the year  ended
December 31, 1998:






<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 REGISTRATION STATEMENT NUMBER                        DESCRIPTION
------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------
<S>                             <C>

   333-24871                    Form S-8, pertaining to the Company's 1992
                                 Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan, Special
                                 Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan and
                                 Non-Employee Directors Fees Plan
   333-24875                    Form S-8, pertaining to the Company's 1992 Incentive
                                Plan
   333-34441                    Form   S-3,   Shelf   Registration    Statement,
                                pertaining to the  registration  of $200 million
                                of  Common  Shares,  Preferred  Shares  and Debt
                                Securities
   333-19187                    Form S-3, pertaining to the Company's Dividend
                                Reinvestment and Share Purchase Plan

</TABLE>

                                                   /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Richmond, Virginia
March 29, 1999
#### Ernest MATZ, Appellant v. PLAYLAND, INC.

No. 17422.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

Nov. 26, 1963.

John P. Miller, Omaha, Neb., for appellant.

Philip Willson, Council Bluffs, Iowa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from District Court dismissed on stipulation of parties.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-2431

SHITU MOHAMMED IBRAHIM,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A95-229-519)

Submitted: July 20, 2005 Decided: August 24, 2005

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rev. Uduak J. Ubom, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Peter D.

Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Michelle E. Gorden, Senior

Litigation Counsel, Michele Y. F. Sarko, Office of Immigration

Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.,

for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*By not raising the issue in her brief, Ibrahim has abandoned

any challenge to the denial of relief under the Convention Against

Torture. 

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Shitu Mohammed Ibrahim, a native and citizen of Ethiopia,

petitions for review an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

(“Board”) affirming and adopting the immigration judge’s decision

denying asylum, withholding from removal and withholding under the

Convention Against Torture.* Finding no error, we deny the

petition for review.

A determination regarding eligibility for asylum or

withholding of removal is conclusive if supported by substantial

evidence on the record considered as a whole. INS v. EliasZacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Our review of the Board’s

“asylum eligibility determination is most narrow . . . [and]

recognizes the respect we must accord the [Board’s] expertise and

its status as the Attorney General’s designee in deportation

decisions.” Lopez-Soto v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 228, 233 (4th Cir.

2004). Administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any

reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to decide to the

contrary. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2000). We will reverse the

Board “only if the evidence presented was so compelling that no

reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of

persecution.” Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 325 n.14 (4th Cir. 2002)

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We find there was
- 3 -

no such compelling evidence. Accordingly, we will not reverse the

Board’s decision. 

“Because the burden of proof for withholding of removal

is higher than for asylum - even though the facts that must be

proved are the same - an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is

necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.]

§ 231(b)(3).” Camara, 378 F.3d at 367. Because Ibrahim is not

eligible for asylum, she cannot meet the higher standard for

withholding of removal.

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
April 28, 2006

27110, 27111

#### R.R., In re

Affirmed
# C_2019131EN.01004202.xml

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/42

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 February 2019 — Giove Gas v EUIPO — Primagaz (KALON AL CENTRO DELLA FAMIGLIA)

(Case T-34/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark KALON AL CENTRO DELLA FAMIGLIA - Earlier EU word mark CALOON - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 131/48)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Giove Gas Srl (Tarquinia, Italy) (represented by: A. Bergonzini and F. Dinelli, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Compagnie des gaz de pétrole Primagaz (Paris, France) (represented by: D. Régnier, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 November 2017 (Case R 1271/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Compagnie des gaz de pétrole Primagaz and Giove Gas.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Giove Gas Srl to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Giove Gas Srl to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 28.5.2018.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 121 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 121

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     February 25, 2015.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 529) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 to improve 529 plans. All points of order against consideration of the bill 
are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
Committee on Ways and Means now printed in the bill shall be considered as 
adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order 
against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question 
shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further 
amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one 
hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion to recommit with 
or without instructions.
    Sec. 2.  At any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, 
pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 5) to support State and local accountability for public education, 
protect State and local authority, inform parents of the performance of their 
children's schools, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall 
be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are 
waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 
hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Education and the Workforce. After general debate, the 
Committee of the Whole shall rise without motion. No further consideration of 
the bill shall be in order except pursuant to a subsequent order of the House.
    Sec. 3.  The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a two-thirds vote 
to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented 
to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported through the 
legislative day of March 2, 2015, relating to a measure making or continuing 
appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2015.
    Sec. 4.  It shall be in order at any time through the calendar day of March 
1, 2015, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules 
as though under clause 1 of rule XV, relating to a measure making or continuing 
appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2015.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
CYCLONIC FLOW DATA

CLIENT / LOCATION: ---r1'2-~ ,~

SAMPLE LOCATION:0~"-.:),-r -z-- ~\<-'-

UNIT NO.: .i:t'='-LTEST NO: c...'-fL L-s:>\~.:.- "'0-=.>~ C~:.\.. '--

BARO. PRESS. (in.Hg): -? C1:: ~

ABS. STATIC PRESS. IN STACK (in.HzO): Ps

DATE: '6l-?--b/·~\.-:::.

I.. ~.

DATA TAKEN BY: • \ ~~ - " TEST DESCRIPTION: _

PITOT TUBE COEFFICIENT: _

PITOT 10:

Vs= 2.90 Cp "Vfl.P Ts "V 29.92 X 28.95

Ps MW \~~:--.J

""""-'''1...e. I

cx.,

Ib/.x!'.'.· 

;TRAVERSEBOINT ,ill TRA VERSE ROINT ".C:'

n ''"'';'' 

: H2~";·~~iN, ;~: cr' ;~;,{~

;C' ".. 

~£,6- C""6'6 Lf (5

SO :3 <:...t

-:2...• ~-:> <6- -2

L, L( .-z

2- L-I I

,,<~

b 0 s 

~ b b

~~ '4 0

~ --;>c"'::) L---\

6 5" 2-

3 6 (

.
#### Ricky McCASKEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

No. F-74-821.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

April 24, 1975.

Summerlin, Williams & Zacharias, by C. Michael Zacharias, Claremore, Court Appointed, for appellant.

Larry Derryberry, Atty. Gen., James L. Swartz, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harold T. Gar-vin, Legal Intern, for appellee.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Ricky McCaskey, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was jointly charged, tried and convicted, with Diane McCaskey, in the District Court, Rogers County, Oklahoma, Case No. CRF-73-173, after a waiver of his right to a jury trial, for the offense of Possession of Marijuana with Intent to Distribute, in violation of 63 O.S. 1971, § 2-401 (B)(2). His punishment was set at two (2) years imprisonment and from said judgment and sentence a timely appeal has been perfected to this Court.

The controlling issue presented in this case is identical with that presented in Diane McCaskey v. State, Okl.Cr., 534 P.2d 1309, delivered by this Court this date, wherein we held that the search conducted under authority of a search warrant based upon the identical Affidavit as the one here involved, which was proven to be false by the testimony adduced at the preliminary examination, constituted a violation of the defendant’s rights guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

For the reasons stated in Diane Mc-Caskey v. State, supra, this case is reversed and remanded with instructions to dismiss.

It appearing to the Court, from the record before us, that Ricky McCaskey is presently incarcerated in the penitentiary, the Clerk of this Court is directed to issue the Mandate forthwith.
From: McKaughan, Colleen

Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 11:27:23 AM To: ebakken@tep.com ; jyockey@tep.com Cc: Nudd, Gregory; Webb, Thomas; Chen, Eugene; Kelly, Shaheerah; GLASS, GEOFFREY; ecm@azdeq.gov Subject: New Court

- Ordered Deadline for Regional Haze FIP

Dear Erik and Jeff,

I’m writing to let you know that the court

- ordered deadline for EPA to propose a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) addressing regional haze in Arizona has been extended to September 6, 2013. Our deadline for final action on Arizona’s State Implementation P lan (SIP) remains July 15, 2013. The deadline for commenting on our December 20, 2012 proposed action on Arizona’s SIP is March 6, 2013.

If EPA finalizes disapproval of any aspect of the Arizona Regional Haze SIP, we are obligated to propose and later fin alize a FIP to address these disapproved portions. The deadlines for these proposed and final actions are set in a consent decree. The parties to the consent decree recently agreed to extend these deadlines and the United States District Court for the Dis trict of Columbia issued an order granting a motion to amend the consent decree to reflect these new deadlines. The new deadlines of September 6, 2013 for the proposed action and February 6, 2014 for the final action provide the agency more time for the te chnical work that will form the basis of the FIP.

If you are planning to provide technical information that you think would be helpful to EPA in preparing our FIP proposal, please provide that information no later than May 10, 2013 . This will allow us eno ugh time to review and consider the information in preparing the proposal.

In the case of Unit 4 at the H. Wilson Sundt Generating Station, we invite you to provide your own five

- factor Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) analysis for nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ). In addition, please include any additional information regarding the historical or anticipated future operation of the Sundt Generating Station (such as coal type, coal use, dispatch priority, cap acity factor, etc) that you consider relevant to our technical work.

If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to let me know. We look forward to hearing from you

soon.

Colleen McKaughan
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Belden & Blake Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the knowledge of the
undersigned:  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: November 13, 2008 By: /s/ Mark A. Houser
Mark A. Houser, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Director This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q and shall not be treated as having been filed as part of the Form 10-Q.  3
#### Dunster v. Dunster

23827

08/12/2002

Affirmed
ANIMAL CARE AID

Questions? Email us at CenterforAnimalWelfare@usda.gov 

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

Animal Care • AC-18-005 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Issued October 2018 • Reviewed February 2024

Bear Nutrition and Winter Lethargy

Proper nutrition is key in maintaining bear health. Formulating diets 

with a veterinarian familiar with bears or a zoo nutritional consultant 

will help to ensure proper nutrition. 

This Animal Care Aid is part of a series developed to provide information about bear health and care.

Refer to the other topics covered in the series for more information on bear care.

WHAT DO CAPTIVE BEARS EAT?

For most species, a commercial carnivore or omnivore-based 

diet or a high-quality dog food—along with varying amounts 

of produce, browse, nuts, and seeds—will give captive bears 

the nutrients they need. Polar bears will naturally eat more 

meat and fish than other species of bears. 

Wild Andean (spectacled) 

bears eat mainly leaves and vegetation, while wild giant 

pandas eat bamboo. Both species can eat a more varied diet 

in captivity, but it is best to avoid feeding them high-sugar, 

high-starch diets because it can lead to obesity. 

DID YOU KNOW?

Contact with infected 

pork or pig products has 

caused pseudorabies in 

brown and black bears. 

To prevent this disease, 

know the source of all 

pork-related products 

because feral swine 

are known to carry 

this disease. 

SEASONAL DIETS

Most black, brown, and 

polar bears eat more 

food and store body 

fat in the fall. Then, 

in winter, they eat 

less as their physical 

activity declines. 

You can support this 

seasonal pattern by 

allowing bears to eat 

as much as they wish 

in the fall and offering 

them more fatty foods. 

WINTER LETHARGY

Captive bears do not truly hibernate. They may enter 

periods of deep sleep (often called winter lethargy), but 

many bears will wake often and require food and water. 

Whether a bear will retreat into his or her den for 

deep winter sleep depends on each bear’s individual 

physiologic state. Not all bears will demonstrate 

this behavior, even bears of the same species under 

identical conditions.

Confining bears to their dens does not induce deep 

winter sleep, and confining them without access to food 

and water or frequent observation will put bears at risk 

for dehydration, malnutrition, and death.

l plant berry bushes/tress

l freeze healthy treats in ice

l hide food in logs or

enrichment devices

FORAGING FOR FOOD

Creating situations where bears “work” for 

their food supports an important natural 

behavior as wild bears spend the majority of their time foraging for food 

and this drive remains in captive bears. Combining food with activity 

is a great way to encourage this behavior. For example:

l scatter food

l offer browse
### RE: Revised Area Source Boiler Preamble and Rule Notes Link

Mary Johnson to

: Higgins, Cortney 12/20/2012 01:02 PM

Cc

: Jim Eddinger, RobertJ Wayland, Thomas Gillis, J onathan Averback, Janet Eck, Peter Tsirigotis

From: Mary Johnson/RTP/USEPA/US

To: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>

Cc: Jim Eddinger/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, RobertJ Wayland/RT P/USEPA/US@EPA, Thomas Gillis/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, J

A verback/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Janet Eck/RTP/USEPA/ US@EPA, Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cortney,

Attached per your e-mail below is the final clean vers ion of the Area Source Boiler Preamble and Rule.

Thanks,

Mary

NESHAP for Area Sources ICI Boilers 2060-AR14_122012.docx

Mary Johnson Environmental Engineer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Mail Code D 243-01 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Phone: (919) 541-5025 Fax: (919) 541-5450

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>

To: Mary Johnson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, T homas Gillis/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Jim Eddinger/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 12/20/2012 12:14 PM Subject: RE: Revised Area Source Boiler Preamble and Rule



### Hi Mary,

We have no further edits the area source rule. Can you send me the final clean version?

Thanks,

### Cortney

From: Johnson.Mary@epamail.epa.gov [ mailto:Johnson.Mary@epamail.epa.gov ]

Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 3:11 PM

To: Higgins, Cortney

Cc: Wayland.Robertj@epamail.epa.gov ; Gillis.Thomas@epamail.epa.gov ; Eddinger.Jim@epamail.epa.gov ; Mason.Keith@epamail.epa.gov ; Averback.Jonathan@epamail.epa.gov Subject: Revised Area Source Boiler Preamble and Rule

Cortney,

Attached is a redline version of the Area Source Boiler preamble/rule. It shows the changes made from the version sent to you on 12/17/2012.



### (See attached file: EO 12866 NESHAP for Area Sources ICI Boilers 2060-
AR14_Redline_121712_v_121912.docx)

Thanks.

Mary

Mary Johnson Environmental Engineer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Mail Code D 243-01 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Phone: (919) 541-5025 Fax: (919) 541-5450