alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### United States Environmental Protection Agency **Docket Index for Proposed**  **Rulemaking Action** 
**EPA**

**- R09** 

**- OAR** 

**- 2016** 

**- 0727** 

**Limited Federal Implementation Plan ;**  **Prevention of Significant Deterioration Requirements for Fine Particulate**  **Matter (PM 2.5**  

### ) **; California; North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District**  **December 2016** 

Note: Copies of the Federal Register (FR) notices listed in Section D are included in the har d copy docket only if they are pre

- 1994 FR notices. FR notices dated from 1994 to the present are publicly accessible at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=FR

.

INDEX # DOCKET SECTION OR ITEM DATE OF ITEM

1 Docket Index for Proposed Rulemaking Action : Limited Federal Implementation Plan ; Prevention of Significant Deterioration Requirements for Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) ; California; North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District December 2016

See Primary
Document : EPA

- R09

- OAR

2016

- 0727

- 0001 81 FR 93872

, Proposed Rule : Limited Federal Implementation Plan ; Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Requirements for Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) ; California; North Coast
Unified Air Quality Management District December 22, 2016

Section A

– Supp o rting Material

A.1 Final Rule: Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers ( PM 2. 5 ), 73 FR 28321 May 16, 2008

A.2 Final Rule: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM 2.5 )

– Incremen ts, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentrations (SMC), 75 FR 64864 Oct. 20, 2010

A.3 Final Rule: Findings of Failure To Submit a Complete State Implement ation Plan for Section 110(a) Pertaining to the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

, 78 FR
2882 January 15, 2013

A.4 Final Rule: Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality State Implementation Plans; California; Infrastructure Requirements for Ozone, Fine Particulate Matter ( PM 2.5 ), Lead (Pb), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2 ), and Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 )

, 81 FR 18766 April 1, 2016A.5 Final Rule: Limited Federal Implementation Plan; Prevention of Significant Deterioration; California; North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District

, 76 FR 48006 Aug. 8, 2011

A.6 Final Rule: Finding of Fail ure to Submit a Prevention of Significant Deterio ration State Implementation Plan Revision for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM 2.5 ) ; California; North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District

, 79 FR 51913 S ept. 2, 2014

A.7 U.S. EPA

- North Coast Unified AQMD Agreement for Delegation of Authority f or Prevention of Sign ificant Deterioration of Air Quality (40 CFR 52

. 21) J anuary 8, 1993

A.8 Agreement for Partial Delegation of the Federal Prevention of Sign ificant Deterioration (PSD) Program Set Forth in 40 CFR 52.21 by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 to the North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District O c t o ber 6, 2015
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

ON REHEARING

NO. 03-12-00832-CR

Adam Perkins, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 61479, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

We withdraw our opinion and judgment dated January 25, 2013 and substitute the

following in its place.

Perkins pleaded guilty to the felony offense of indecency with a child by

contact, and on June 28, 2008, the trial court sentenced him to twelve years’ imprisonment. On 1

November 19, 2012, Perkins filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s denial of his “application

for writ of habeas corpus.” We construe Perkins’s appeal as challenging the denial of his 2

The trial court certified that this is a plea bargain case in which Perkins has no right of 1

appeal and that Perkins waived the right of appeal.

Perkins captioned his request for a free copy of his trial records as an “application for 2

writ of habeas corpus.” In response, the trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law

combined with an order denying all of Perkins’s requested relief.
request for a free trial record for use in preparing a postconviction habeas application. See In re

Black,Nos. 12-12-00048-CR, 12-12-00049-CR, 12-12-00050-CR, 12-12-00051-CR, 2012Tex.App.

LEXIS 845, at * 1 (Tex. App.—Tyler Jan. 31, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (not designated

for publication).

The district court’s refusal to provide Perkins with a free copy of his trial record does

not invoke our jurisdiction. See Self v. State, 122 S.W.3d 294, 294-95 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2003,

no pet.); see also Diaz v. State, No. 07-10-00328-CV, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 1985, at *3

(Tex. App.—Amarillo Jan. 21, 2011, pet. ref’d) (mem. op.). We lack jurisdiction to consider an

appeal from an order denying a request for a free copy of the trial record when, as here, such

request is not presented in conjunction with a timely filed direct appeal. See id. (citing Everett

v. State, 91 S.W.3d 386 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002, no pet.)). Further, even if Perkins had appealed

the trial court’s denial of his “application for habeas corpus,” we lack jurisdiction to grant

postconviction habeas corpus relief from final felony convictions. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann.

art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2012); Ex parte Alexander, 685 S.W.2d 57, 60 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985).

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

 

Jeff Rose, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Rose

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction on Rehearing

Filed: March 27, 2013

Do Not Publish

2
EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 Partnership.
 By: 
Name:
    
    /s/ Sean P. McGrath

Sean P. McGrathTitle:
    
    Chief Financial Officer of the Managing General PartnerDate:
    
    August 15, 2011
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     Exhibit 3.3

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                              AMENDED AND RESTATED
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                     SECURITY FIRST TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION

            It is hereby certified that:

            FIRST: The name of the Corporation is Security First Technologies
Corporation (the "Corporation").

            SECOND: Section 1 of the Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation of the Corporation is hereby amended and restated in its entirety
as follows:

                   "1. NAME

                   The name of this corporation is S1 Corporation (the
"Corporation")."

                   THIRD:  The foregoing amendment to the Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation has been adopted by the stockholders of the
Corporation at a special meeting duly called and held upon notice in accordance
with Section 222 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware at
which meeting the necessary number of shares as required by statute were voted
in favor of the amendment.

                   FOURTH:  The foregoing amendment was duly adopted in
accordance with the applicable provisions of Section 242 of the General
Corporation law of the State of Delaware.

                   FIFTH:  The effective time of this Certificate of Amendment
shall be 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on November 10, 1999.



                                     - 13 -
P u rsuan t t o 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5, t h e courtha s det erm i n ed that t h i s opi n i on * shou l d n otbe pu bl i shed an d i s not preceden texcept u n der t h e l i m i t ed c i r c um s t anc e s s e tf

o r t h i n 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5. 4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 11055 C onfer enc e Cal endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t i f f
- A pp el l ee v. EM I LI O ARNOLDO ORT I Z
- COCA, D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f ort he N or t her n D i st r i c tof Texas U SDC N o . 3 : 0 7
- CR- 3 8 5
- ALL B ef ore H IG G IN B O T H A M , D AV IS, an d C L E M E N T , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * A pp eal i n g t h e j u dg m en ti n a cr i m i n alcase, E m i l i o A rnol do O rt i z- C oca pre se nt s ar gum ent s t hathe co nce des are f or ec l os ed by Un i t e dS t a t e s v . B r o wn , 9 2 0 F .2 d 1 2 1 2 , 1 2 1 6 -1 7 (5 th C ir . 1 9 9 1 ), abrogat e d on ot hergrounds by Un i t ed S ta tes v. Ca n d ia , 454 F . 3d468 , 472
- 73 (5t h C i r. 2 006 ) , w h i ch h el d t h at a d i st ri ct court m ay order a t erm of i m pri sonm en tt o ru n con secutivel y w i t h a n un i m posed United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Aug ust18, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 11055

2 s ta te s e n te n c e . T h e G o v e r n m e n t’s m o tio n fo rs u m m a r ya ffir m a n c e is GRANT ED , a n dt h e j u d g me n to f t h e d i s t r i c tc o u r ti s A F F I RMED.
EX-35.6
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services
MAC R1204-010
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045

Tel: 410 884 2000
Fax: 410 715 2380


Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.
301 South College Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28228-0166


RE: Annual Statement as to Compliance

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells
Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows for the calendar year 2012:

(a) a review of Wells Fargo's activities as assigned and agreed to under the
servicing agreement(s) listed on Schedule A hereto (the "Servicing
Agreement(s)") has been made under my supervision; and

(b) to the best of my knowledge, based on such review Wells Fargo has fulfilled
all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement(s) in all material
respects throughout the reporting period, except as noted in Schedule B.


March 15, 2013

/s/ Julie Eichler
JULIE EICHLER
Vice President


Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

(logo) Together we'll go far


(page)


(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services
MAC R1204-010
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045

Tel: 410 884 2000
Fax: 410 715 2380


To: Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.

Schedule A

List of Servicing Agreement(s) and Series

Pooling and Servicing Agreement for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities,
Inc. Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2011-C5, Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. as Certificate Administrator, as applicable.

Pooling and Servicing Agreement for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities
Inc. Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2012-C10, Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. as Certificate Administrator, as applicable.

Pooling and Servicing Agreement for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities
Inc. Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2012-C6, Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. as Certificate Administrator, as applicable.

Pooling and Servicing Agreement for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities,
Inc. Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2012-C8, Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. as Certificate Administrator, as applicable.

Pooling and Servicing Agreement for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities
Inc. Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates Series 2012-LC5, Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. as Certificate Administrator, as applicable.


Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.


(page)


(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services
MAC R1204-010
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045

Tel: 410 884 2000
Fax: 410 715 2380


To: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Schedule B

Material Instances of Non-Compliance

No instances to report


Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
#### Laack, Respondent, vs. Laack, Appellant.

*November 11*

December *7, 1954.*

*313For the appellant there was a brief and oral argument by *George Barrock*of Milwaukee.

For the respondent there was a brief and oral argument by *John A. Udovc*of Milwaukee.

Fairchild, C. J.

The motion of the appellant was properly denied. Aside from the fact that there is no evidence *314that respondent concealed any witnesses and that the “written material,” revealing as it may be of respondent’s regard for another than her former husband, came into being several months after the divorce judgment was entered, it clearly appears that the motion is not timely as being within the limited period fixed by statute for such procedure. The rule governing here is that a motion for a new trial founded upon newly discovered evidence may be heard upon affidavits and the papers in the action, but such a motion is to be made within one year from the verdict or finding. Sec. 270.50, Stats. *Zinc Carbonate Co. v. First Nat.*Bank, 103 Wis. 125, 79 N. W. 229; *Erickson v. Clifton,*265 Wis. 236, 61 N. W. (2d) 329.

*By the Court.*— Order affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 197 (Thursday, October 10, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 82248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-23492]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Investigator Initiated 
Program Project Applications (P01 Clinical Trial Not Allowed).
    Date: November 7, 2024.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 
National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3G42, 
Rockville, MD 20892 (Video Assisted Meeting).
    Contact Person: Sandip Bhattacharyya, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural 
Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 
National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3G42, 
Rockville, MD 20892 (240) 292-0189, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6013010e0409104e02080114140103080112191901200e09084e070f16"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b3c0d2ddd7dac39dd1dbd2c7c7d2d0dbd2c1cacad2f3dddadb9dd4dcc5">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 7, 2024.
Lauren A. Fleck,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-23492 Filed 10-9-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 1 3

- 1 0361 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No s . 8 : 12

- cv - 00 914

- JSM

- TGW , 8:09

- cr - 00440

- JSM

- TGW

- 3

ALTON JONES , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v ersus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Respondent

- Appellee

.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida

________________________ ( April 4, 2014 )

Before PRYOR, MARTIN , and EDMONDSON , Circuit Judges.

Case: 13-10361 Date Filed: 04/04/2014 Page: 1 of 32 PER CURIAM:

Alton Jones , a federal prisoner proceeding pro se , appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 22 55 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence

. Jones sought to raise two claims of ineffective assistance of counsel based on his trial counsel’s failure to advise him of his ability to enter an open guilty plea and failure to pursue a substantial

- assistance departure in a timely man ner . On appeal, Jones argues that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to advise him of Jones’s ability to enter open guilty pleas. He states that he was unaware of his ability to enter his pleas without a plea agreement or to enter an agreement without an appeal waiver. He contends that he was prejudiced by his counsel’s assistance : his pleas we re , in effect, involuntary and he was precluded from pursuing a direct appeal or seeking habeas relief

. He also contends that the district court’s sentence

-- although within the guidelines

-- is unreasonable. The government asserts that the record is ins ufficient to evaluate the question on appeal and requests that we remand the case for further proceedings and factual development. It contends that the district court’s rationales (mainly that Jones had voluntarily pleaded guilty) for denying Jones’s moti on were flawed because the rationales ignored the substance of Jones’s claims and were not supported by the record. The government notes that the record is currently

Case: 13-10361 Date Filed: 04/04/2014 Page: 2 of 33 insufficient to evaluate the performance of Jones’s trial counsel, partially due to the
g overnment’s choosing to submit no affidavit from said counsel

.

“ In a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding, we review a district court’s legal conclusions de novo and factual findings for clear error

. ” Devine v. United States , 520 F.3d 1286, 1287 (11th Cir. 2008). “ A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is a mixed question of law and fact that we review de novo

. ” Id. We agree with the government that the district court erroneously concluded that Jones was precluded from raising his claims based on his guilty pleas , where Jones specifically cha llenged the voluntariness of the pleas. We also agree that the record is insufficiently developed to evaluate Jones’s trial counsel’s performance. Therefore, we vacate the district court’s dis missal order and remand the case for further proceedings and factual development. VACATED AND REMANDED . Case: 13-10361 Date Filed: 04/04/2014 Page: 3 of 3
VII

Private Calendar No. 17

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 302

[Report No. 106–906]

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 27, 2000

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

SEPTEMBER 27, 2000

Referred to the Private Calendar and ordered to be printed

AN ACT

For the relief of Kerantha Poole-Christian.

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

3 SECTION 1. CLASSIFICATION AS A CHILD UNDER THE IMMI4 GRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—In the administration of the Im6 migration and Nationality Act, Kerantha Poole-Christian

7 shall be classified as a child within the meaning of section

8 101(b)(1)(E) of such Act, upon approval of a petition filed
2

•S 302 RH

1 on her behalf by Clifton or Linette Christian, citizens of

2 the United States, pursuant to section 204 of such Act.

3 (b) LIMITATION.—No natural parent, brother, or sis4 ter, if any, of Kerantha Poole-Christian shall, by virtue

5 of such relationship, be accorded any right, privilege, or

6 status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Passed the Senate November 19, 1999.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.

Private Calendar No. 17

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 302

[Report No. 106–906]

AN ACT

For the relief of Kerantha Poole-Christian.

SEPTEMBER 27, 2000

Referred to the Private Calendar and ordered to be

printed
EXHIBIT 35.2

SERVICERS CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Re: Assessment of compliance for services provided pursuant to the Master Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated February 27, 2007, the Series Supplement,
dated October 3, 2012, the US$ Note Trust Deed, dated October 8, 2012, and other transaction documents relating to SMART ABS Series 2012-4US Trust (collectively, the Agreements).

The undersigned hereby certifies that:



| | 1. | I, Alan Cameron, am a Director of Macquarie Securities Management Pty Limited (the Manager).
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | A review of the Managers activities during the period from April 1, 2013 through March 31, 2014 (the Reporting Period), and of its performance under each of the Agreements has been
made under my supervision.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Manager has fulfilled all of its obligations under each of the Agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 25 June 2014



|                                           
|-------------------------------------------
|/s/ Alan Cameron                           
|Alan Cameron                               
|Director                                   
|                                           
|Macquarie Securities Management Pty Limited
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 202 (Friday, October 18, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 83928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24056]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage [supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service <SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: October 18, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service [supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 9, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage [supreg] Contract 
380 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-44, K2025-43.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-24056 Filed 10-17-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Exhibit
99.17


7








CONSENT








Ladies and
Gentlemen:








The undersigned hereby
consents to (1) the references to the undersigned’s name
included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form
40-F of Denison Mines Corp. in connection with the report entitled
“Technical Report with an Updated Mineral Resource Estimate
for the Waterbury Lake Property, Northern Saskatchewan” dated
December 21, 2018, and (2) all other references to the undersigned
included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form
40-F of Denison Mines Corp.











Dated: March 13,
2019





(Signed) “Alan Sexton”


______________________


Alan
Sexton, M.Sc., P.Geo.