alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: "Whiteman, Chad" < Chad_ S_Whiteman@omb.eop.gov >

Date: July 7, 2015 at 9:48:08 PM GMT+5:30

To: "Newberg, Cindy" < Newberg.Cindy@epa.gov >

Cc: "Schillo, Bruce" < Schillo.Bruce@epa.gov >, "Hufford, Drusilla"

< Hufford.Drusilla@epa.gov >

Subject: RE: Following up

I appreciate the level of attention you folks gave to the details of the rule and the consideration given to

public comments. It was really hel pful to have you folks at the EO 12866 meetings to help answer

questions and keep the ball rolling. I hope that the international negotiations go well

.

From: Newberg, Cindy [ mailto:Newberg.Cindy@epa.gov ]

Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 8:32 PM

To: Thomas, Amanda

Cc: Schillo, Bruce; Hufford, Drusilla; Whiteman, Chad

Subject: RE: Following u p

Thanks Amanda and Chad for all your work on this.
Manage Wildlife To Prevent Avian Influenza

Highly pathogenic avian influenza is a very contagious disease that kills domestic poultry. Wild birds such as

ducks, gulls, and shorebirds can carry and spread avian influenza viruses without any signs of illness. To protect 

your poultry, keep wild birds away from your farm. Here are some simple steps you can take today:

The lethal removal of native wildlife is regulated under Federal 

and State laws. USDA and other experts do not recommend 

lethally removing native wild birds to prevent the spread of avian 

influenza or other diseases. Because wild birds are abundant 

and constantly moving, using lethal methods is not practical 

or environmentally sound. It is much more effective to remove 

sources of wildlife attraction than to manage wild animals after 

they have arrived on your property.

Remove Standing Water

c Grade property to avoid pooling

water. Fill or grade areas where

water stands for more than

48 hours after a heavy rainfall.

c Don’t walk or move equipment

through or near standing water—

this could track wildlife feces or other contaminants

with the virus into your barns.

c Use French drains and culverts to carry water away

from poultry houses.

c Never use untreated surface water for watering poultry

or cleaning poultry barns and other facilities

Manage Ponds and Basins

c Prune or remove plants from banks

of manmade water structures.

c Use wire grids, predator decoys, and

scare devices to keep waterfowl away

from ponds or basins.

c Use fencing to separate natural ponds from the active area

around barns.

Reduce Food Sources

c Don’t feed wildlife!

c Locate feed structures on a

clean pad.

c Inspect pipes and connections

regularly for leaks.

c Keep a broom and lidded garbage

container at every feed storage area for quick cleanups.

c Reduce natural food sources by removing fallen fruit and

mowing grass often.

c Don’t pile used litter near barns.

Cover Waste

c Keep carcasses and compost

piles covered at all times.

c Always close and latch

dumpster and trash can lids.

Secure Buildings

c Repair holes in barn walls.

c Regularly check and repair

damaged screens on windows

and doors.

c Install netting or screens and

use repellent gel or bird spikes

to deter perching.

c Regularly inspect foam installation for signs of

rodent or bird digging, chewing, or pecking.

c Wash away or remove old nests before each

nesting season.*

c Install decoys and scare devices and move them often

so wildlife don’t get used to them.

* It is unlawful to remove nests with eggs or young

birds in them.

Need help managing wildlife on your farm? Call 1-866-4USDA-WS (1-866-487-3297).

Learn more about how to protect your flock from HPAI and other diseases: 

aphis.usda.gov/animalhealth/defendtheflock • cdc.gov/flu/avianflu

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. APHIS-22-010 | Issued May 2022
# E strada	A

viation	Resour ces

1121 Landsdale Ln. Saginaw Texas 76179

I, Antonio Estrada, Estrada Aviation Resources, hereby submit an exemption from part 21, subpart H and sections 45,23(b), 61,113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103(b), 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), 91.417(a)(b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations. The purpose of thi s exemption is to operate a Phantom 2 Vision+ quad

- copter unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial photography, videography, and cinematography for realtors, homeowners, home builders, and home contractors for real estate marketing in the Dallas

- Fo rt Worth metroplex

. This exemption would benefit the public by assuring the operation of the UAV will be operated in a safe and economical fashion in the Dallas Fort Worth area . The public will be able to view the Dallas

- Fort Worth area real estate on th e Internet without having to travel to the area. The operation will include : 1. A 1242g, quad

- copter, Phantom 2 Vision + Unmanned Aircraft System 2. Airspeed will not exceed 30 knots 3. UAV will not be operated at an altitude of no more than 2 00 feet AGL 4. UAV will be operated within visual line of sight of the PIC 5. UAV will also have a visual observer at all times within verbal communication range 6. Phantom 2 Vision operating manual will be accessible during operations and be made available to the Administrator upon re quest 7. Phantom 2 Vision will be programed to return to original departure point in case it lose s communication or GPS signal 8. A preflight check for safe condition will be conducted by the PIC prior to flight and logging in the aircraft records. This check will include the Ground Control Station. 9. All maintenance will be performed by an FAA certificated A & P mechanic and logged i nto UAV maintenance records . A maintenance flight check will be performed prior to operations 10. Maintenance will include a 100 hour and annual inspection of all operating systems11. Prior to operations the PIC will have a total of 25hrs total time as UAS rotor craft pilot, to

include 5 hours PIC in make and model as applied for in the exemption. 12. PIC will have a minimum of 5 take offs and landings prior to operations for currency purposes 13. PIC will notify local Air Traffic Control prior to operation or flight 14. UAS will not be operated within 5 nautical miles of an airport 15. UAS will be serialized, registered IAW 14CFR part 47 and have N

- number markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45,Subpart C. Markings will be as large as practicable 16. All operations shall be conduct ed over private or controlled

- access property with permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative

If additional information is required, please feel free to contact me at (972) 998

- 2610 or email EAR2957@yahoo.com.

Regards,

Antonio Estrada Owner/Operator Estrada Aviation Resources
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS OF THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           4,417
<SECURITIES>                                     5,855
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,974
<ALLOWANCES>                                       691
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                16,873
<PP&E>                                           1,497<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  24,323<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,513
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           255
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,555
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    24,323
<SALES>                                         14,814
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,814
<CGS>                                            5,777
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,777
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (471)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  29
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,194)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        50
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,244)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,244)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.25)
<FN>
<F1>PP&E IS NET OF ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION OF $5,819.
<F2>TOTAL ASSETS INCLUDE $290 OF OTHER ASSETS AND INVESTMENTS OF $1,437.
</FN>


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C SS. 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form, 10-Q/A-1 (the "Report") of
Amaru, Inc. (the "Company"), for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Chua Leong Hin,
President and Chief Executive Officer of 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:

         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/ Chua Leong Hin
----------------------------------
President, Chief Executive Officer
August 6, 2010
# C_2010011EN.01001905.xml

| 16.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 11/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/19

---

Order of the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Court of 23 September 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-397/08) (1)

1

2010/C 11/35

Language of the case: Portuguese

Language of the case: Portuguese

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.

1

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 108 (Wednesday, July 18, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1275]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                    HONORING ARIEL KOMINIQUE TAYLOR

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. BENNIE G. THOMPSON

                             of mississippi

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a 
remarkable young woman, Ms. Ariel Kominique Taylor. Ariel was born in 
Indianola, Mississippi, to LaShunda King and Kamia Taylor. She is a 
dedicated member of Weeping Mary Baptist Church and proud member of the 
Humphreys County High School Class of 2012.
  Ariel's commitment to academic excellence earned her the title of 
Salutatorian for Humphreys County High School Class of 2012. At 
Humphreys County High School, Ariel was a charter member of Students 
Making a Change, SMAC, a participant in The Mayor's City Youth Council, 
and was a member of the Youth with a Vision Community Choir. She also 
served as a sports journalist for the school's newspaper, a member of 
the Varsity Cheerleader Squad, and the school's tennis team.
  After graduating, Ariel plans to attend Jackson State University and 
major in mathematics with an emphasis in accounting.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask our colleagues to join me in recognizing Ms. Ariel 
Kominique Taylor for her continued effort in achieving excellence in 
education and leadership.

                          ____________________
```
**Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 December 2008 – Commission v Luxembourg**

**(Case C‐223/08)**

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2006/100/EC – Non‐transposition within the prescribed period

1.                     *Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration
– Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 7)*

2.                     *Freedom of movement for persons – Amendment of secondary legislation by reason of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania –
Directive 2006/100 (Art. 226 EC; Council Directive 2006/10) (see paras 6-10)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt or notify, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Council Directive 2006/100/EC of 20 November 2006 adapting certain Directives in the field of freedom of movement of persons, by reason of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania (OJ 2006 L 363, p. 141). |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2006/100/EC of 20 November 2006 adapting certain Directives in the field of freedom of movement of persons, by reason of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs. |
#### Austin, Appellee, *v.*Austin, Appellant.

(No. 32093

Decided March 29, 1950.)

*Mrs. Eva Epstein Shaw,*for appellee.

*Messrs. Be,slip & Gibson,*for appellant.

*538It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Stewart, Turner and Taft, JJ., concur.
### f.•·c·1··" ' ·1· ·(.['

... 1 ,, '· J

T ,'_,0 \•**~.** 

### Op o-1·· 

### l"'Cil(' ! ,;l' L• 

## 20151\f\f{ 27**~~till:** 

## 07

March 19, 2015 Director, Chemical Control Division US Environmental Protection Agency Office ofPollutionPrevention and Toxics EPAEast Room4146 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004


### Re: EPA- HQ- OPPT- 2003 · 0012 CBIC Control Number 

# 364445

DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts Chambers Works Deepwater, NJ 08023



### DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. 

### NJ0005100 PFOA Data Submittal- Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples February 2015 Sample Data
Dear Chemical Control Division:
Attachedplease find summaries ofPFOA analytical results for the DuPont Chambers Works weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662AinFebruary 2015. Due to a sampling problem, a 24-hour composite sample that completed onFebruary 17, 2015 was submittedfor analysis inlieu ofthat week's normal grab sample. The composite sample was withinhold time andprevious internal.studies supported good agreementbetween grab and composite samples.


### In accordance withthe current site NJPDES permit (NJ0005100, effective September 2011), theseresults are providedto NJDEP on a monthlybasis via electronic discharge monitoring reports. The enclosures include two paper and two electronic copies ofthe analytical results from this monitoring period.

# Sin~erely·················**.-~** r·-----**\..,/-...~.J ~I**  

### / 

# J ·11'115 Amutlia Jeyarajasingam Area Manager-SecureEnvironmental Treatment DuPont Chambers Works
AJ/clc
EnclosuresCopyto:
/ Document Control Office US Environmental Protection Agency Office ofPollution Prevention and Taxies EPAEast Room 6428 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460
Ms. Heather Genievich (cover letter only) NJDEP Division ofWater Quality Bureau ofSurfaceWater Permitting Mail Code401-02B 401 E. State Street P.O. Box420 Trenton, NJ 08625-0420SampleiD Date Top (ft) Total (T)/ Bottom (ft) Analyte units Diss. (D) Duplicate# PFOA ug/L T

- -·

< and ND 

## = Non detect at stated reporting limit 

### Summary of Analytical Results 662

- February 2015 662-GRAB 662-GRAB 662-COMP 2/2/15 2/9/15 2/17/15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 4.19 2.75 2.32
PFOA = Perfluorooctanoic Acid ug/L

- micrograms per Liter 662-GRAB 2/23/15 0 0 1 3.45

ug/L- micrograms per liter or parts per billion (ppb) LOQ limit of quantification 0.100 ug/L 

### I Samples were analyzed by Critical Path Services LLC. Reported results represent a single analysis. except for the samples collected on 2/17/15 and 2/23/15. Acceptable precision was obtained and the reported result for the samples collected on 2/17/15 and 2/23/15 represent the average of lab duplicate results. 

### I The NJDEP lab certification number for Critical Path Services LLC is PA072.



### I I

Page 1 of 1 Copy of cwk 662 results_feb15.xls:Sheet1 3/19/2015 4:10 PM
**Exhibit 23**

**INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S CONSENT**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of Covalent Group, Inc. and subsidiaries on Form S-8 (File Numbers 33-95602 and 333-37756) and Form S-3 (File Number 333-44096), of our report datedMarch 10, 2003, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Covalent Group, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2002.

| /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP  |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                                |   |
| **Philadelphia, Pennsylvania** |   |
|                           |   |
| **March 26, 2003**             |   |
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Robert Wayne MONTGOMERY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-10188.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Aug. 26, 2005.

Denise B. Williams, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Michael James Brown, Snyder, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

*ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES*

PER CURIAM: *

This court affirmed the sentence of Robert Wayne Montgomery. *United States v. Montgomery,*No. 04-10188 (5th Cir. Dec. 16, 2004). The Supreme Court vacated and remanded for further consideration in light of *United States v. Booker,*— U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). *See Montgomery v. United States,*— U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 1948, 161 L.Ed.2d 765 (2005). We requested and received supplemental letter briefs addressing the impact of *Booker.*

Montgomery argues that his sentence must be vacated and the case remanded *977under *Booker*because the facts on which the district court relied to enhance his sentence were not charged in the indictment, admitted by him, or proven by the Government beyond a reasonable doubt. Montgomery’s contention that review is de novo because he preserved the *Booker*error lacks merit. *See United States v. Ocana,*204 F.3d 585, 589 (5th Cir.2000). Montgomery fails to meet his burden of showing that the district court’s sentence under guidelines it deemed mandatory affected his substantial rights such that his sentence amounts to plain error. *See United States v. Mares,*402 F.3d 511, 520 (5th Cir.2005), *petition for cert. filed*(Mar. 31, 2005)(No. 04-9517).

Because nothing in the Supreme Court’s *Booker*decision requires us to change our prior affirmance in this case, we reinstate our judgment affirming Montgomery’s conviction and sentence.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6372

AUBREY BRIAN EDWARDS, Petitioner - Appellant,

v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Dept. of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:07-cv-00330-RGD-TEM-1) Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: August 8, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aubrey Brian Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Aubrey Brian Edwards seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Edwards has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We also deny Edwards’ motions for bail or release pending appeal and for transcripts at government expense. 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
October 9, 2014



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

PINNACLE PREMIER PRO PERTIES, INC. AND PI NNACLE REALTY

ADVISORS, INC , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00194

- CV V.

GHISLAIN BRETON, CAT HERINE DENICOURT AND DAVID ANDREIS

, Appellee s

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the order granting temporary injunction in favor of appellee s , Ghislain Breton, Catherine Denicourt and David Andr eis, signed March 4, 2014, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find the trial court erred in granting the order . We therefore order the temporary injunction order of the court below REVERSED and RENDER judgment denyi ng appellees’ request for a temporary injunction.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellee s , Ghislain Breton, Catherine Denicourt and David Andreis.

We further order this decision certified below for observa nce.