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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Drug Enforcement Administration

                    By Notice dated September 1, 2000, and published in the                     **Federal Register**                    on September 25, 2000, (65 FR 57621), Glaxo Wellcome Inc., Attn: Jeffrey A. Weiss, 1011 North Avendell Avenue, P.O. Box 1217, Zebulon, North Carolina 27597-2309, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as an importer of remifentanil (9739), a basic class of controlled substance listed in Schedule II.                

The remifentanil is being imported for the production of Ultiva dosage forms and for research and new product development. 

No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered the factors in title 21, United States Code, section 823(a) and determined that the registration of Glaxo Wellcome Inc. to import remifentanil is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971, at this time. DEA has investigated Glaxo Wellcome Inc. on a regular basis to ensure that the company's continued registration is consistent with the public interest. These investigations have included inspection and testing of the company's physical security systems, audits of the company's records, verification of the company's compliance with state and local laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to section 1008(a) of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act and in accordance with title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, section 1301.34, the above firm is granted registration as an importer of the basic class of controlled substance listed above.

Dated: November 7, 2000.

John H. King,

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.

[FR Doc. 00-30291  Filed 11-27-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER AND N OTICE OF I NTENT TO D ISMISS FOR W ANT OF P ROSECUTION

Appellate case name: Vozarron, Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal District

Appellate case number: 01

- 16

- 00 224

- CV

Trial court case number: 2009

- 57 5 92

Trial court: 164th District C ourt of Harris County

On Ma y 23 , 201 6 , appellant, Vozarron, Inc., filed a n affidavit of indigence in th is Court for the appellate fi ling and clerk’s record fee purposes and stated, among other things, that the reporter’s record is unnecessary. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 37.3(c) (1) . T he
Clerk of this Court requested that the trial clerk file an indigent clerk’s record. On Ju ly 6

, 201 6 , the indigent clerk’s record w as filed in this Court attaching, among other documents, the trial court’s order, signed on June 2 1 , 2016, sustaining the district clerk’s contest to appellant’s affidavit of indigence. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 20.1(e)(1), (i)(4).

A party claiming indigence for appellate costs may seek review of a trial court’s order sustaining a contest to its affidavit of indigence by filing a motion challenging the order, within 10 days of that order, in the appellate court. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 20.1(j)(1), (2). Here, because appellant failed to timely file such a motion, the Clerk of this Court is directed to mark appellant not indigent for purposes of appellate costs. See id. 20.1(j)(2).

Accordingly, b ecause appellant ha s not established ind igence, it is ORDERED
that appellant pay the filing fee and pay, or arrange to pay, the clerk’s record fee to the
trial clerk and file evidence with the Clerk of this Court of those payment arrangements within 3 0 days of the date of this order, or this appeal may be dismissed without
further notice

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 5, 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c).

It is so ORDERED

.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura Higley

X Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: July 14, 2016
Case 7:22-cr-00027-O Document 26 Filed 08/31/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 61
Case 7:22-cr-00027-O Document 26 Filed 08/31/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 62
Exhibit 99.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PACE Health Management Systems, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
John Pappajohn, Director and Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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/ John Pappajohn
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         John Pappajohn
                                                         Director and Acting CEO
                                                         May 12, 2003



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to PACE Health Management Systems, Inc. and will be retained by PACE
Health Management Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       13
P140564.en2

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 14-0564 

Post-Focus Draft Revision 2 8/7/2014

ENGINEER: Austin \ JAS 

SUBMITTER: Emerald Kalama Chemical, LLC 

 

 

 

 

 



Page 1
P140564.en2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consumer Use: No 

SAT (concerns) (05/28/2014):

Related Cases and Misc SAT Info: 

Migration to groundwater: Moderate 

PBT rating: P1B1T1 

Health: 1-2 Dermal, Drinking Water, Inhalation 

Eco: 3 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 1 ppb) 



Page 2
P140564.en2

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 0-1

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: 

Generated by the 09/30/2013 version of ChemSTEER. 

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

None.

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW: No 

Page 3
P140564.en2

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 14-0564 

 

Page 4
P140564.en2

 

 



Page 5
P140564.en2



Page 6
P140564.en2

Page 7
P140564.en2

Page 8
P140564.en2

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 14-0564 

 

 

 

Page 9
P140564.en2

Page 10
P140564.en2

Page 11
P140564.en2

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 14-0564 

 

 

 

Page 12
P140564.en2

is distilled to remove the PMN (<5%). After distillation, the PMN is recycled 

or disposed by off-site incineraiton. Because incin releases << 28,000 

kg/site-day and << 698,000 kg/site-yr, CEB does not assess this potential 

release below.



Page 13
P140564.en2

Page 14
P140564.en2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 15
P140564.en2

Page 16
##### 



Exhibit 10.128 March 24, 2004 Cripple Creek Securities, LLC
195 Maplewood Avenue
Maplewood, New Jersey 07040
Attention: Maurice Hryshko, Counsel and Attorney in Fact
Facsimile No.: (973) 313-6495 Re: Notice of Termination of Structured Equity Line Flexible Financing Agreement Pursuant to Section 10.4 of the Structured Equity Line Flexible Financing
Agreement dated as of October 1, 2001 (the Agreement), between Cripple Creek
Securities, LLC, and Cygnus, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the State of Delaware (the Company), the Company hereby
terminates the Agreement. CYGNUS, INC.By:
    
    /s/ John C HodgmanName:
    
    John C HodgmanTitle:
    
    Chairman, President and CEOcc:
    
    Arnold & Porter1600 Tysons Blvd.McLean, Virginia 22102Attn. L. Stevenson ParkerFacsimile No.: (703) 720 7399
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 Groen Brothers Aviation, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David
Groen, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
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/
      David GroenDavid
      GroenPresident,
      Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer(Principal
      Executive and Principal Financial Officer)
 
 Date:
November 10, 2009
From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov> To: "Kris E. DuBois" <KEDuBois@gvea.com> Date: 7/22/2010 3:42 PM Subject: Re: Extension Request - Golden Valley Electric Association Attachments: pic07288.gif; GVEA Ext Req EPA WW ICR 071410.pdf

Greetings,

EPA has reviewed your extension requ est for the steam electric effluent guidelines questionnaire for the Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) Healy facility. The deadline for your plant to submit Version 2 of the completed questionnaire is extended to October 15, 2010. If you need assistance during the completion of the steam electric questionnaire, please contact the steam electric helpline via e-mail at steamhelp@erg.com or by phone at 1-877-353-7560.

Sincerely,

(Embedded image moved to file: pic07288.gif)

From: "Kris E. DuBois" <KEDuBois@gvea.com>

To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/14/2010 04:12 PM

Subject: Extension Request - Golden Valley Electric Association

Good afternoon: GVEA requests an ex tension for completion of the Steam Electric Power Generating Industry ICR. Please see the attached document. A hard copy is forthcoming via certified mail. Thank you for considering our request and please call me if you have any questions. – Kris DuBois/GVEA Environmental Officer

Kristen DuBois Environmental Officer Golden Valley Electric Association 758 Illinois Street Fairbanks, AK 99707-1249 (907) 451-5627 office (907) 458-6369 fax (907) 388-6300 cell (See attached file: GVEA Ext Req EPA WW ICR 071410.pdf)
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 Quarterly Report of LeCroy Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 2, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), I, Thomas H. Reslewic, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 16, 2010



/s/ Thomas H. ReslewicThomas H. ReslewicChief Executive Officer


A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Ex parte SOLSONA.

No. 21467.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 15, 1941.

*762See, also, 144 S.W.2d 270.

Joe Burkett, of San Antonio, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court of Bexar County refusing the application of Fred Solsona to have the amount of bail required of him in the sum of $2,500 reduced to $500.

The application alleges that relator was held in the custody of the sheriff upon a charge of robbery by assault; that he had been held to bail in the sum of $2,500 and that this amount is excessive; that petitioner is a man of humble means, poor, and without friends available as sureties in such an excessive amount.

It will be presumed that the records of the case were before the court and that he acted upon all of the factors which may be considered in fixing the amount of bail. The record contains a statement of facts which would justify a jury in finding him guilty. The appeal appears to be predicated upon the sole theory that the relator was unable to make bond in the amount of $2,500 and that it was the duty of the court for this reason to reduce the same to an amount which he could make.

It is the duty of the court under the constitution and laws to fix a reasonable bond, and in the event the amount should be unreasonable this court would order the same reduced. Ex parte Osborne, 127 Tex.Cr.R. 136, 75 S.W.2d 265. However, it has' been frequently held that the ability of the party to make bond is not the sole and only factor. The nature of the offense and the punishment which may be meted out are factors which the court should properly consider in fixing the bond. Ex parte Jones, 107 Tex.Cr.R. 438, 296 S.W. 886; Ex parte Nelson, 125 Tex.Cr.R. 439, 69 S.W.2d 126; Ex parte Brooks, 127 Tex.Cr.R. 535, 78 S.W.2d 183. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the amount of bail is excessive, considering the charge under which he is held and the punishment which may be meted out, and, in the absence of a showing that the evidence is insufficient upon which to hold him for the crime, the amount of bail appears to be reasonable.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
#### In the Matter of City of New York, Petitioner, v Thomas F. Hartnett, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Labor, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Commissioner of the New York State Department of Labor, dated July 21, 1988, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s application for a permanent variance from compliance with the requirements of the Federal standards for fire helmets adopted under Labor Law § 27-a (4).

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

It is well established that in order to annul an administrative determination made after a required hearing, a court must be satisfied after reviewing the record as a whole that the determination is not supported by substantial evidence *(see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176; *Matter of Lahey v Kelly,*71 NY2d 135). Where the determination of an agency is supported by substantial evidence, it is beyond judicial review, and a reviewing court may not " 'weigh the evidence or reject the choice made by [the agency] when the evidence is conflicting and room for choice exists’ ” *(Matter of Collins v Codd,*38 NY2d 269, 271, quoting *Matter of Stork Rest. v Boland,*282 NY 256, 267; *Matter of Moorehead v New York City Tr. Auth.,*147 AD2d 569).

The petitioner contends that the report submitted by the Hearing Officer failed to take into consideration, on the petitioner’s application for a permanent variance from compliance with the requirements of the Federal standard for fire helmets adopted under Labor Law § 27-a, a number of evidentiary items favorable to the so-called "New Yorker 5-A” fire helmet. *556However, we find that the Hearing Officer’s assessment of the evidence and determination as to the inferences to be drawn therefrom, were supported by substantial evidence, and should therefore not be disturbed *(see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, supra).*Thompson, J. P., Brown, Kunzeman and Miller, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>




                       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 National Energy Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10 K/A for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Randall D. Cooley, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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/ RANDALL D. COOLEY
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Randall D. Cooley
                                      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



*  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
   provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
   the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




                                       17
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1371 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1371

 To provide for additional extension periods, not exceeding 2 years in 
 the aggregate, in the time allowed for reexportation of certain goods 
             admitted temporarily free of duty under bond.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 16, 1993

   Mr. Smith of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for additional extension periods, not exceeding 2 years in 
 the aggregate, in the time allowed for reexportation of certain goods 
             admitted temporarily free of duty under bond.

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

SECTION 1. REEXPORTATION OF COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE ARTICLES.

    (a) In General.--(1) The first sentence of U.S. Note 1(a) to 
subchapter XIII of chapter 98 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States is amended--
            (A) by striking ``and (2)'' and inserting ``(2)''; and
            (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
        following: ``, and (3) for articles imported under heading 
        9813.00.05, the time for exportation may be extended for 1 or 
        more further periods which, when added to the initial 1 year, 
        shall not exceed a total of 5 years, but any application for an 
        extension beyond the 3rd year must be accompanied by the 
        importer's certification that the articles are dedicated for 
        incorporation into a communications satellite.''.
    (2) The amendments made by subsection (a) apply with respect to 
goods entered on or after the date that is 3 years before the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Expedited Mitigation of Penalty Assessments on Reexportations 
Delayed by Launch System Failures.--Goods imported under heading 
9813.00.05 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States after 
January 1, 1983, and before the effective date established under 
subsection (a)(2) that are certified by the importer--
            (1) as having been dedicated for incorporation into a 
        communications satellite; and
            (2) as not having been exported within the time required 
        for exportation under the applicable bond directly or 
        indirectly as a result of launch schedule delays resulting from 
        any launch failure, launch system failure, or technical delay;
are subject to liquidated damages not exceeding 1 percent of the 
liquidated damages established in the applicable bond.

                                 <all>
```