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

Edmonton International Airport

Naturally Wallace Consulting

LOCATION

Edmonton, Canada

PROJECT TYPE

Airport Deicing

COMPLETION DATE

2011

DESIGN FLOW

Up to 4000 m

3

/day

TREATMENT

Gravel Bed with Forced 

Bed AerationTM

PARTNER

Associated Engineering

2

0

0

NEED

Glycol contaminated stormwater at Edmonton International Airport stays 

frozen every winter until the spring thaw. At this point, glycol and other 

plane and pavement deicing compounds are washed away to a large 

collection pond. Water from the pond requires treatment prior to 

discharge in a nearby creek. The existing wetland system has been 

treating the flow for almost a decade, but with expansion of the airport, a 

major increase in overall treatment capacity was required. 

SOLUTION

The system expansion is designed to provide over 700 kg-BOD5/d

treatment capacity and will be engineered to provide increased influent 

flow rates as the concentration of the BOD5 drops during spring melt.

The upgrade will include reconfiguration of up to three of the existing 

treatment trains. The first wetland cell will be modified to a vertical flow 

configuration and incorporate Forced Bed AerationTM. The second cell in 

the train will be reconfigured as a surface flow wetland for polishing of the 

effluent. A nutrient feed system will also be included to allow addition of 

nutrient solution to match the level of organics in the influent.

BENEFIT 

With addition of aeration and nutrients, the existing wetland system can 

provide up to 10x more treatment in half the footprint. The aeration and 

nutrient systems are designed so that levels can be adjusted based on 

influent concentrations. Converting to aerated gravel beds removes the 

hydraulic constraints previously experienced with the horizontal flow 

wetlands. A new lift station also provides substantially more flexibility 

with meeting the aberrant flows of spring melt. Finally, incorporation of a 

recycle system permits expedited start-up in the spring.

Aerial photo courtesy of Associated Engineering

Naturally Wallace Consulting

4276 Greenhaven Ct.

Vadnais Heights, MN 55127

612 802 2329

Naturallywallace.com

Process design experts

eexperts in treatment wetlands
**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

 

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code), the undersigned officer of NeoPharm, Inc., a Delaware corporation(the “Company”), does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly Report ofthe Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “10-Q Report”) that:

 

(1)                                  the 10-Q Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  the informationcontained in the 10-Q Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  August 9, 2005 | /s/ Ronald G. Eidell    |   |
|-----------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                        | Ronald G. Eidell        |
|                        | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----

Thiscertification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section,nor shall it be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing underthe Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

----
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § CASE NO.: 3:22-CR-00326-L

§

CARLOS RONSHA THOMAS, JR. (19) §

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry of a Plea of Guilty, the Consent 

of the defendant, and the Report and Recommendation Concerning Plea of Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge, 

and no objections thereto having been filed within fourteen days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the 

undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge concerning the 

Plea of Guilty is correct, and it is hereby accepted by the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty, and 

CARLOS RONSHA THOMAS, JR. is hereby adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C), and 18 U.S.C. § 2, 

namely, Possession With the Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, Aiding and Abetting. Sentence will be imposed 

in accordance with the Court's scheduling order.

☒ The defendant is ordered to remain in custody.

☐ The Court accepts the findings of the United States Magistrate Judge by clear and convincing evidence that the 

defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released and should therefore 

be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ Upon motion, this matter shall be set for hearing before the United States Magistrate Judge who set the conditions 

of release for determination, by clear and convincing evidence, of whether the defendant is likely to flee or pose a 

danger to any other person or the community if released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ The defendant is not ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) pending determination of whether it has 

been clearly shown that there are exceptional circumstances under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be 

detained under § 3143(a)(2), and whether it has been shown by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is 

not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released under § 3142(b) or (c). This 

matter shall be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge who set the conditions of release.

SIGNED this 21st day of October, 2024.

________________________________________

SAM A. LINDSAY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cr-00326-L Document 593 Filed 10/21/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1882
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Page 1 of 2

FP 47890047.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

JASON WALTERS,

Plaintiff,

v.

EXEL, INC. D/B/A DHL SUPPLY CHAIN,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-cv-01840-K

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendant Exel Inc. d/b/a DHL Supply Chain (“Defendant”), pursuant to Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 56 and Local Rule 56, moves this Court for entry of summary judgment in its

favor on the claims alleged against it by Plaintiff Jason Walters (“Plaintiff”).

Defendant will address each of the requirements of Local Rule 56.3 in its Brief in Support 

of this Motion.

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully prays that this Court:

1. Grant this Motion because there are no genuine issues of material fact and 

Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law with respect to all of Plaintiff’s 

claims;

2. Enter final judgment in Defendant’s favor for each of Plaintiff’s claims; 

3. Award Defendant its reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees incurred in 

connection with defending against claims and contentions not supported by existing 

facts or law; and

4. Award Defendant its costs and such other and further relief to which it is justly 

entitled.

Case 3:22-cv-01840-K Document 55 Filed 02/16/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID 696
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Page 2 of 2

FP 47890047.1

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Annie Lau

Annie Lau

Texas Bar No. 24057723

FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP

500 N. Akard Street, Suite 3550

Dallas, Texas 75201

Telephone: (214) 220-9100

Facsimile: (214) 220-9122

alau@fisherphillips.com

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

EXEL INC. d/b/a DHL SUPPLY CHAIN

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On the 16th day of February, 2024, I filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court 

for the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, using the Court’s Electronic Case 

Filing system. I hereby certify that I have served the document on all counsel of record by a manner 

authorized by FED. R. CIV. P. 5 (b)(2).

Bob Whitehurst 

5380 Old Bullard Road, Suite 600, #363

Tyler, TX 75703

whitehurstlawfirm@yahoo.com 

Donald E. Uloth

LAW OFFICE OF DONALD E. ULOTH

18208 Preston Road, Suite D-9 #261

Dallas, TX 75252

don.uloth@uloth.pro

/s/ Annie Lau

Annie Lau

Case 3:22-cv-01840-K Document 55 Filed 02/16/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID 697
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 222

Authorizing the President to proclaim 1993 as ‘‘America-the-Beautiful Year’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 30, 1993

Mr. STUDDS introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the President to proclaim 1993 as ‘‘Americathe-Beautiful Year’’.

Whereas the poem or hymn, ‘‘America the Beautiful’’ beloved

of all Americans, was written by the American poet and

educator, Katharine Lee Bates, in the year 1893;

Whereas the poem or hymn, ‘‘America the Beautiful’’, expresses and celebrates certain fundamental American

qualities and ideals; namely, the beauty and fertility of

our bountiful American land, the strength, skill, and productivity of the American people, their courage and will,

and the American vision of freedom and a good life for

all citizens; and
2

•HJ 222 IH

Whereas the need is already present, at the 100th anniversary of the writing of the poem or hymn, ‘‘America the

Beautiful’’, to rededicate the Nation’s energies to those

qualities and ideals expressed and celebrated in the

hymn, and to reassert the responsibilities of free people

to the proper stewardship of their land and to the nurturing of the lives of their fellow Americans: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the President is authorized and requested to issue

4 a proclamation designating the year 1993, the 100th anni5 versary of the writing of the poem or hymn, ‘‘America the

6 Beautiful’’, by Katharine Lee Bates, as ‘‘America-the7 Beautiful Year’’, which shall be dedicated, generally, to

8 a reexamination of the American heritage and the Amer9 ican character, and which shall be dedicated to encourag10 ing all the States, counties, cities, towns, and villages, and

11 all industries, businesses, and institutions in the Nation,

12 and all agencies and bureaus of the Federal Government,

13 during America-the-Beautiful Year, to initiate or complete

14 specific projects, to be designated as ‘‘America-the-Beau15 tiful Year projects’’, that shall embody the principles of

16 conservation, historic preservation, and enlightened plan17 ning, and that shall reflect the highest ideals of a free,

18 responsible, and creative people.

Æ
# Official Journal L 137/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 137 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4925 May 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 137

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4925 May 2006

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 778/2006 of 24 May 2006 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 779/2006 of 24 May 2006 amending Regulation (EC) No 488/2005 on the fees and charges levied by the European Aviation Safety Agency (1) | 3 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 780/2006 of 24 May 2006 amending Annex VI to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs | 9 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 781/2006 of 24 May 2006 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature | 15 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

Commission Regulation (EC) No 778/2006 of 24 May 2006 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 779/2006 of 24 May 2006 amending Regulation (EC) No 488/2005 on the fees and charges levied by the European Aviation Safety Agency (1)

3

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 780/2006 of 24 May 2006 amending Annex VI to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs

9

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 781/2006 of 24 May 2006 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature

15

| | | II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA |
| | | EFTA Surveillance Authority |
| | * | Recommendation of the EFTA Surveillance Authority No 59/05/COL of 5 April 2005 on the co-ordinated inspection programme in the field of animal nutrition for 2005 | 19 |

II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

EFTA Surveillance Authority

*

Recommendation of the EFTA Surveillance Authority No 59/05/COL of 5 April 2005 on the co-ordinated inspection programme in the field of animal nutrition for 2005

19

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
# C_2014078EN.01000702.xml

| 15.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/7

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 February 2014 — CEEES and Asociación de Gestores de Estaciones de Servicio v Commission

(Case T-342/11) (1)

1

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Spanish service station market - Decision dismissing a complaint - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Failure to fulfil obligations made compulsory by a Commission decision - Reopening of the proceedings - Fines - Periodic penalty payments)

2014/C 78/14

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Confederación Española de Empresarios de Estaciones de Servicio (CEEES) (Madrid, Spain) and Asociación de Gestores de Estaciones de Servicio (Madrid) (represented by: A. Hernández Pardo and B. Marín Corral, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: initially M. Muñoz Pérez, then S. Centeno Huerta, and finally A. Rubio González, Abogados del Estado) and Repsol Comercial de Productos Petrolíferos, S.A. (represented by: J. Jiménez-Laiglesia Oñate and S. Rivero Mena, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant

Re:

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2011) 2994 final of 28 April 2011 dismissing the complaint brought by the applicants regarding infringements of the competition rules committed by Repsol (Case COMP/39.461).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Confederación Española de Empresarios de Estaciones de Servicio (CEEES) and the Asociación de Gestores de Estaciones de Servicio to bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Confederación Española de Empresarios de Estaciones de Servicio (CEEES) and the Asociación de Gestores de Estaciones de Servicio to bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs;

| 4. | Orders Repsol Comercial de Productos Petrolíferos, S.A. to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders Repsol Comercial de Productos Petrolíferos, S.A. to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 252, 27.8.2011.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § 2:22-CR-00094-Z-BR

§

ALEX HALISSI BELL (1) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

ALEX HALISSI BELL (1), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 1997), has 

appeared before me pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count 2 of the Indictment. After 

cautioning and examining ALEX HALISSI BELL (1) under oath concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I 

determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense charged is supported by an 

independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore recommend that the plea of 

guilty be accepted, and that ALEX HALISSI BELL (1) be adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C) -

POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE METHAMPHETAMINE and have sentence imposed accordingly. After 

being found guilty of the offense by the District Judge,

☒ The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1) unless the Court finds by clear and 

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community 

if released.

☐ The Government does not oppose release.

☐ The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

☐ I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other 

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ The Government opposes release.

☐ The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

☐ If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the 

Government.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) unless (1)(a) the Court finds there is a 

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has 

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown 

under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be detained, and (2) the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence 

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released.

Date: January 6, 2023

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its 

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States 

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

Case 2:22-cr-00094-Z-BR Document 32 Filed 01/06/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 71
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE>       5
                
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         Jun-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            Jul-01-1998  
<PERIOD-END>                              Sep-30-1998
<CASH>                                       419,000
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      0
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             628,000
<PP&E>                                       384,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                73,000 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             1,186,000 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        826,000
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                      24,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   336,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               1,186,000
<SALES>                                            0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   0
<CGS>                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              1,378,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (12,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (1,366,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (1,366,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                              (1,366,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.06)
          
               
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2009

GARY KEVIN MATTIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; KIMBERLY J. DELGRECO; TONIA L. LEWIS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CA-03-10-3) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary Kevin Mattis, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:- 2 - Gary Kevin Mattis appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil action for lack of jurisdiction and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Mattis v. United States Dep’t of Justice , No. CA-03-10-3 (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 9, 2003; Apr. 9, 2004). 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.

AFFIRMED