alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                                               
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                               
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                                           
|View History:                                                                                                  
|                                                                                                               
|West Virginia Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                               
|                                                                                                               
|West Virginia Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 803    | 33     | 0      | 37     | 26     | 135    | 914    | 25     | 121    | 2     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 993    | 568    | 107    | 0      | 2,421  | 740    | 1,069  | 2,053  | 1,453  | 435   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 908    | 33     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
Filed 12/6/18 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2018 ND 251

Eric Lance Sabot, Petitioner and Appellant

v.

State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

No. 20180191

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Dann E. Greenwood, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Benjamin C. Pulkrabek, Mandan, ND, for petitioner and appellant.

Ladd R. Erickson, Assistant State’s Attorney, Washburn, ND, for respondent and appellee; submitted on brief.

Sabot v. State

No. 20180191

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Eric Sabot appeals from a district court order summarily dismissing his application for post-conviction relief.  Sabot was found guilty of terrorizing and his conviction was affirmed in State v. Sabot, 2017 ND 280, 904 N.W.2d 469.  Sabot applied for post-conviction relief claiming his sentence was illegal, he was denied equal protection of the law, he received ineffective assistance of counsel, and evidence not previously heard required vacation of his sentence.  The State answered Sabot’s application and moved for summary disposition, claiming his application did not raise issues of material fact.  Sabot responded to the motion but did not submit any affidavits or other competent admissible evidence.  The district court summarily dismissed the application, ruling Sabot failed to raise an issue of material fact. 

[¶2]We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2),(7); Howard v. State, 2015 ND 102, 863 N.W.2d 203 (holding applicant for post-conviction relief resisting a motion for summary disposition may not rely on pleadings or unsupported conclusory allegations, but must present competent, admissible evidence raising issue of material fact).

[¶3]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jon J. Jensen

Jerod E. Tufte
#### BRILEY v. STATE.

No. 24474.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 9, 1949.

Jack Varner, Nacogdoches, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

. Appellant was assessed a fine of $50.00 on a charge of driving a motor vehicle on a public highway while intoxicated.

 It is not .necessary to-'discuss the evidence-. Bill of. Exception No. 1 complains of the .jury verdict. As -shown by the,judgment entered 1⁄8.the.-case,.the jury was given its charge and;.after considering the evidence, returned-,its 'verdict in the following language:. “We,' .the-, jury,- find the defendant guilty and-assesS his punishment at a fine of $50." The'bill complaining of this is without merit;

Bill of Exception' No.. 2 complains of the argument of the district, attorney,' in the following language, “Gentlemen of the Jury: I do npt object to a. reasonable fine in this case, for when convicted the defendant will be deprived of his rjght to drive a motor .vehicle for a period of six months. And he is charged with and will be tried on a charge of reckless driving.” The bill sets out, further, that this argument was not made in reply to or invited by any argument of defendant’s counsel; that if is not based on any evidence in the case; that it wás “improper and highly prejudicialthat it “constituted testimony *243by the County. Attorney and was inflammatory and calculated to injure the rights of defendant * * It is stated that the defendant objected to.it and requested the court in writing to withdraw it from the jury, which he declined to do.

This bill is approved by the court and constitutes a certificate that error was committed in the trial of the case. On the basis of the judge’s certificate, the case must be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial. It is. so ordered.
**Exhibit
      32.1**


CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the annual report of TraceGuard Technologies, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB/A (Amendment No. 1) for the period ending December 31,
      2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Avi
      Kostelitz ,
      Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:





(1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities and 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.











Date:
                April 28, 2008
            By:/s/
                Avi KostelitzAvi
                KostelitzPresident,
                Chief Executive Officer and
                Director





This
      certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      with
      this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall
      not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company
      for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange of 1934, as amended,
      or
      otherwise
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5345 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 3-[8-Amino-1-(2-phenyl-quinolin-7-yl)- 

imidazo[1,5-a]pyrazin- 3-yl]-1-methyl-cyclobutanol (OSI–906). 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. DOLD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 3-[8-Amino-1-(2-phenylquinolin-7-yl)-imidazo[1,5-a]pyrazin- 3-yl]-1-methylcyclobutanol (OSI–906). 

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

3 SECTION 1. 3-[8-AMINO-1-(2-PHENYL-QUINOLIN-7-YL)- 

4 IMIDAZO[1,5-A]PYRAZIN-3-YL]-1-METHYL5 CYCLOBUTANOL (OSI–906). 

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

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

9 new heading: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5345 IH

‘‘ 9902.01.00 3-[8-Amino-1-(2-phenylquinolin-7-yl)-imidazo[1,5- 

a]pyrazin-3-yl]-1-methylcyclobutanol (OSI–906) 

(CAS No. 867160–71–2) 

(provided for in subheading 2933.49.2600) ..... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32



Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer



Certification of Periodic Financial Report



Seon Hong Kim and Patrick Hartman hereby certify as follows:



1. They are the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of Center Financial Corporation.



2. The Form 10-K of Center Financial Corporation for the Year
Ended December 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and the information contained in the report on Form 10-K fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Center Financial Corporation.



|                      |  |  |  |  |  |                        |  |                                                  
|--------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Dated: March 30, 2005 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    SEON HONG
KIM  
|                      |  |  |  |  |  |                        |  | Seon Hong Kim President & Chief Executive Officer
|                      |  |  | 
|Dated: March 30, 2005 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    PATRICK HARTMAN
|                      |  |  |  |  |  |                        |  | Chief Financial Officer
|                                                                                          
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History:                                                                             
|                                                                                          
|Alabama Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                          
|                                                                                          
|Alabama Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 151    | 1      | 6      | 251    | 30     | 427    | 192    | 308    | 11     | 2     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 272    | 595    | 11     | 373    | 2      | 181    | 44     | 485    | 84     | 313   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 78     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certificationof Chief Executive Officer**

**Pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002**

**(18 U.S.C.§ 1350)**

 

In connection with thequarterly report of SouthWest Water Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended June 30, 2010 (the “Report”), I, Mark A. Swatek,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350), that:

 

1)              to my knowledge, the Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2)              the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| Dated: August 6,  2010 | /s/ MARK A. SWATEK      |   |
|-----------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                        | Mark A. Swatek          |
|                        | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5317 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5317

  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on mixtures containing n-
      butyl-1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one and application adjuvants.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

Ms. Slaughter introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on mixtures containing n-
      butyl-1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one and application adjuvants.

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

SECTION 1. MIXTURES CONTAINING N-BUTYL-1,2-BENZISOTHIAZOLIN-3-ONE AND 
              APPLICATION ADJUVANTS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.40.57 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to mixtures containing n-butyl-
1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one and application adjuvants) is amended by 
striking the date in the effective period column and inserting ``12/31/
2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
MEMORANDUM

Date: March 20, 2 012

Subject: Supplemental Facility Information Obtained from Various State/Local

Agencies and Additional Analysis

From: Greg Nizich, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/FIG

To: EPA Docket ID: EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2010

- 0505

I. PURPOSE

This memorandum summarizes contact , via email or telephone, with air program staff at

the following agencies regarding specific oil and natural gas production facilities within their

State/local program s :

- South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

- Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (APCD)

- Texas Commission for Environmental Quality (TCEQ)

This memorandum also determines the expected BTEX limit compliance requiremen t for

the Vintage Production facility in Ventura County, CA and the resulting change in Maximum

I ndividual Risk (MIR)

.

II. SUMMARY OF FACILITY AND CONTACT INFORMAT ION

Facility NEI ID Date Agency (contact) Status

Sun Exploration and

Prod uction NEI213611 12/27/11 SC AQMD (Jay Chen) Shutdown

Hillcrest Beverly Oil Co NEI20769 1/27/12 SCAQMD (Victor Juan) Area source

Hillcrest Beverly Oil Co NEICA0371191 1/27/12 SCAQMD (Victor Juan) Area source

Alta Mesa, East Bay

Comp ressor Station NEI2442 2/7/12 TCEQ (Adam Bullock) Area source for HAP

Plains Exp loration &

Production NEICA2683753 2/2/12 SCAQMD (Rafael

Reynosa) Area Source

Vintage Production NEICA1115664 1/17/12 Ventura Co. APCD

(Kerby Zozula) Major source.

See below for additional

information.2

III. VINTAGE PRODUCTION F ACILITY ASSESSMENT

The following additional information was obtained from Ventura County APCD

regarding operations of the glycol dehydrator at the Vintage Production facility listed in the table

above.

Existing operations :

The facility operates one dehydrator having a throughput of 1 million standard cubic

feet/day ( MMSCFD ) ( i.e., 28,300 m 3 /day). The inlet concentrations to the dehydrator are as

follows:

Benzene

- 38.9 ppmv

Toluene

- 18 ppmv

Ethylbenzene

- 1 ppmv

Xylene

- 5 ppmv

Total BTEX = 62.9 ppmv

Based on its natural gas throughput of 1 MMSCFD this unit is a small dehydrator and would

have to meet the BTEX limit specified under 40 CFR 63.765(b)(1)(iii) according to the

following formula:

BTEX limit :

BTEX Lim it = 3

. 28 X 10

- 4 * throughput * BTEX * 365*1 Mg/ ( 1 X 10 6 ) g

(Note

- Throughput units are m 3 /day)

Limit = 3

. 28 X 10

- 4 * 28,300 * 62.9 * 365 * 1 Mg/ ( 1 X 10 6 g ) = 0. 21 Mg; or 0. 23 tons BTEX

Risk based on small dehydrator limit :

The MIR for Vintage Production at proposal was 14, driven by benzene emissions of 0.29 tons.

The calculated BTEX limit is 0.23 tons. Based on the ratio of benzene in the inlet gas stream

- 38.9 ppmv/62.9 ppmv * 100% = 61.8%

- we would expect the benzene em issions to be comprise

approximat ely 62% to the BTEX total . Therefore

, benzene emissions would be 0.14 tons or

lower

. Since this is approximately 50% of the benzene emissions in our original risk assessment,

we would expect the resulting MIR to decrease to 7.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60211-60212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25900]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

    Notice is hereby given that on October 2, 2000, a proposed Consent 
Decree in United States v. Whiteford Kenworth, Inc., et al., Civil 
Action No. 3:99 CV 0055AS, was lodged with the United States District 
Court for teh Northern District of Indiana.
    The Consent Decree settles an action brought under Section 107 of 
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability 
Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601, et seq., (``CERCLA'') for the recovery of past 
costs incurred by the United States in responding to releases or 
threatened releases of hazardous substances at the Whiteford Sales & 
Service Site, located in South Bend, Indiana. The proposed settlement 
set forth in the Consent Decree addresses the liability of four 
defendants in this action, each of which has been named as an owner 
and/or operator of the Site. Under the terms of the proposed decree, 
the settling defendants will pay the United States a total of $350,000 
in settlement of the United States' past costs claims against them.
    The Department of Justice will receive, for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication, comments relating to the 
Consent Decrees. Comments should be addressed

[[Page 60212]]

to the Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural 
Resources Division, Department of Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, 
D.C. 20044-7611, and should refer to United States v. Whiteford 
Kenworth, Inc., et al., D.J. Ref. 90-11-3-06145.
    The Consent Decree may be examined at the office of the United 
States Attorney, Northern District of Indiana, 204 South Main Street, 
South Bend, Indiana 466001, and at United States Environmental 
Protection Agency Region V, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604. A copy of the proposed consent decree may also be 
obtained by mail from the Department of Justice Consent Decree Library, 
P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC. 20044. In requesting a copy please refer 
to the referenced case and enclose a check in the amount of $5.25 (25 
cents per page reproduction costs), payable to the Consent Decree 
Library.

Bruce S. Gelber,
Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 00-25900 Filed 10-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M