alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### FPL Port Everglades US Fish and Wildlife Consultation Andrew Parks to: Flajole, Andy, Kosky, Ken 05/03/2012 01:18 PM Cc: Gregg Worley, Heather Ceron, Kathleen Forney Hi Andy, please see the below email from US Fish and Wildlife regarding the request for informal consultation and their determination. Feel free to contact me or Winston Hobgood with FWS regarding any addition issues related to this matter. Sincerely, Andrew B. Parks, P.E. Environmental Engineer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303 Phone: 404-562-8122 Fax: 404-562-9019 ----- Forwarded by Andrew Parks/R4/USEPA/US on 05/03/2012 01:15 PM ----- From: Winston

_ Hobgood@fws.gov To: Andrew Parks/R4/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 05/03/2012 01:11 PM Subject: FPL Port Everglades Next Generation Clean Energy Center 

## Dear Mr. Parks, The U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service has received your request for informal consultation, dated February 22, 2012. The above-referenced project involves the replacement of four existing oil-fired generators with one natural gas-fired 1,250 megawatt unit. The proposed replacement will result in net decreases of sulphur dioxide, p articulate matter , nitrogen oxides, and lead and net increases of carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and greenhouse gasses. Florida Power and Light (FPL), as the Region 4 Environmental Protection Agency's non-Federal agent, has concluded that " N o adverse impacts to federal or state listed species are expected in association with construction..." FPL has agreed to comply with the Manatee Protection Plan for 3 years. The Service supports FPL's determination. Thank you for your cooperation in the effort to conserve fish and wildlife resources. If you have any questions regarding this email, p lease contact Winston Hobgood at 772-469-4306. Sincerely yours,

## Winston Hobgood US Fish and Wildlife Service 1339 20th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Exhibit
      32.1





Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002










CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS


ADOPTED
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF TEHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I,
      Charles Camorata, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
      Report of Skreem Entertainment Corporation on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
      period ended September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
      in
      such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
      condition and results of operations of Skreem Entertainment
      Corporation





By:
                /s/ Charles CamorataName:
                Charles CamorataTitle:
                Chief Executive OfficerNovember
                19, 2007
800 Independence Ave., S.W.

Washington, DC 20591

AFS-13-544-P

September 29, 2014

Mr. Austin Lohman

2115 13th Street NW

Minot, ND 58703

Dear Mr. Lohman:

This is in response to your letter dated September 17, 2013 posted to the public docket 

(No. FAA-2013-0825) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to initiate 

rulemaking to amend § 61.23(b) of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). In your 

petition, you request a regulatory change to permit members of the U.S. Armed Forces 

aviation community to utilize their military aviation physical in place of the FAA medical 

certificate if the individual has successfully completed a medical examination authorizing 

pilot flight status.

In accordance with 14 CFR § 11.73, the FAA must use the following criteria when 

making a decision as to whether or not to amend current regulations based on a petition 

for rulemaking:

1) The immediacy of the safety or security concerns you raise;

2) The priority of other issues the FAA must deal with; and 

3) The resources we have available to address these issues.

Each year, the FAA prioritizes its rulemaking projects based on issues that are crucial to 

the safety of the aviation community and the traveling public to ensure the FAA delivers 

the most value to the aviation system. 

After reviewing your request based on the current priorities for the FAA and the 

guidelines found in § 11.73, we determined the issue you raised does not meet the criteria 

to pursue rulemaking at this time. However, we will place your comments and arguments 

for the proposed rule change in a database, which we will examine when we consider 

future rulemaking. 

If the FAA does pursue rulemaking in this area in the future, you would be able to find 

out and track it through one of the two following websites:
2

• For significant rulemakings, you can find the status on the Department of 

Transportation’s (DOT) website: http://www.dot.gov/regulations/report-onsignificant-rulemakings. 

• For non-significant rulemakings, you can find the status on the DOT’s semiannual regulatory agenda, through the Office of Management and Budget’s 

(OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affair’s (OIRA) Unified 

Agenda website: (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain). 

For the reasons above, we are dismissing your petition for rulemaking in accordance with 

14 CFR § 11.73.

Sincerely,

/s/

Lirio Liu

Director, Office of Rulemaking
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 03, 2019. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, April 03, 2019 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A19D0381. DEBRA W. BULLARD v. THE BLACKSTONE GROUP et al. . Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 2018CV313080
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-3623

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Marcus L. Charleston

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau

____________

Submitted: August 21, 2018

Filed: August 31, 2018 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.
Marcus Charleston directly appeals the sentence the district court imposed

1

after he pleaded guilty to drug and firearm offenses. His counsel has moved to

withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Charleston questions the district court’s imposition of a consecutive sentence

for his conviction for possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime. 

We conclude, however, that the district court wasrequired to impose the consecutive

sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(D)(ii); United States v. Gonzales, 520 U.S. 1,

11 (1997) (plain language of § 924(c) forbids district court from directing that term

of imprisonment under that statute run concurrently with any other term of

imprisonment). Charleston also challenges the reasonableness of his sentence. We

reject this challenge, given that the district court imposed the shortest aggregate

sentence possible in the absence of a government motion. See 18 U.S.C.

§ 924(c)(1)(A)(i), (c)(1)(D)(ii); 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B); United States v. Woods,

717 F.3d 654, 659 (8thCir. 2013) (standard ofreview; statutorymandatory-minimum

sentence was shortest sentence possible absent government motion and was not

substantively unreasonable).

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s

motion and affirm.

______________________________

The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., United States DistrictJudge for the

1

Eastern District of Missouri.

-2-
# L_2012333DE.01004801.xml

| 5.12.2012 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 333/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2012

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 333/48

---

Berichtigung der Durchführungsbeschluss 2012/135/EU der Kommission vom 28. Februar 2012 über Schlussfolgerungen zu den besten verfügbaren Techniken (BVT) gemäß der Richtlinie 2010/75/EU des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über Industrieemissionen in Bezug auf die Eisen- und Stahlerzeugung

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 70 vom 8. März 2012
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 70 vom 8. März 2012

Auf Seite 93, bei BVT 78:

anstatt:

„Die mit BVT assoziierte Gesamteffizienz der Stauberfassung ist > 90 %“

muss es heißen:

„Die mit BVT assoziierte durchschnittliche Gesamteffizienz der Stauberfassung ist > 90 %“.

Auf Seite 96, bei BVT 88:

anstatt:

„Die mit BVT assoziierte durchschnittliche Gesamteffizienz der Abgaserfassung ist > 98 %.“

muss es heißen:

„Die mit BVT assoziierte durchschnittliche Gesamteffizienz der Erfassung ist > 98 %.“

---
### ------------


## SERVED FEBRUARY 24, 2010 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC --,_._----­

IN THE MATTER OF 

### AERO TIRE & 

### TANK LLC FAA DOCKET NO. CP08SWOOll (Civil Penalty Action) DMS No. FAA-2008-1307 

## AMENDED PROCEDURAL ORDER Paragraph#2 ofthe Procedural Order is amended as follows: WHEREFORE, the parties be and are hereby ORDERED to adhereto the following procedural schedule:

... On or before May 1, 2010, theparties shall conclude all discovery including, butnot limitedto, depositions, documentproduction, responses toproduction requests and/or interrogatories. 

## If theparties cannot resolve a discovery dispute they shallsubmit the dispute to the undersigned for resolution in a timely ] manner...

..:.....'
............ C. Goodwin U.S. Administrative LawJudge Attachment

- Service List

I The court does not anticipate scheduling this case prior to I May 20IO.

### FAA Docket No. CP08SWOOll (Civil PenaltyAction) SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & 

### ONE COpy 

### Hearing Docket Federal AviationAdministration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington,DC 20591 Att: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur WrightBuilding

- Room 2014 1 ONE COPY Derrick J. Hahn Counsel for Respondent 900 Jackson Street, Suite 180 Dallas, TX 75202 TEL: (214) 744-3200 FAX: (214) 744.;3202
Rena M. Price, Senior Attorney Safety Enforcement Branch Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel· Southwest Region, ASW -7E1 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663 FortWorth, TX 76137-0007 TEL: (817) 222-5068 FAX: (817) 222-5945 

### The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin Office ofHearings,M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-320 Washington, D.C. 20590 TEL: (202) 366-2139 Attorney-Advisor (202) 366-5121 Legal Assistant FAX: (202) 366-7536

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the follo.wing address: Hearing Docket, Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building

- Room 2014, Washington, DC 20591, Att: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGG430.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of MAP
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:

(i) the
accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/S/    TIMOTHY S.
NELSONTimothy S. Nelson
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)


Dated: November 5, 2010

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

Certification of Principal Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of MAP Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), hereby
certifies, to his knowledge, that:

(i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
period ended September 30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.



/S/    CHRISTOPHER Y.
CHAIChristopher Y. Chai Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)


Dated: November 5, 2010

A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to MAP Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by MAP Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| (1)   | the      Annual Report on Form 10-Q of SupportSave Solutions, Inc. for the quarter      ended August 31, 2008 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 Annual Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter      ended August 31, 2008, fairly presents in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of SupportSave Solutions,      Inc. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/Christopher Johns                          |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                               |
| Name:  | Christopher      Johns                             |
|   |                                               |
| Title: | Principal      Executive Officer and      Director |
|   |                                               |
| Date:  | October      13, 2008                              |
|   |                                               |
|   |                                               |
| By:    | /s/      Michael Palasick                          |
|   |                                               |
| Name:  | Michael      Palasick                              |
|   |                                               |
| Title: | Principal      Financial Officer                   |
|   |                                               |
| Date:  | October      13, 2008                              |
EX-4.6



 Exhibit 4.6 

AMENDMENT NUMBER 5 TO THE INDIVIDUAL DISTRIBUTION SALES 

DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 
 (as
effective January 1, 2010) 
 The Individual Distribution Sales Deferred Compensation Plan (“Plan”) is hereby amended as follows: 

The name of this Plan is changed effective June 1, 2014 to “The MetLife Premier Client Group Voluntary Deferred Compensation Plan”. All
references to the Plan name in the Plan document including the definition of the word “Plan” in subsection 22.20 shall be changed accordingly. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Plan Administrator has caused this amendment to be adopted this 3rd day of June,
2014. 
  

	
	
	/s/ Mark Davis
	Plan Administrator

  

	
	
	/s/ Mayer Naiman
	Attest
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2830

To preclude the admissibility of certain confessions in criminal cases.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 29, 2000

Mr. LEAHY (for himself and Mr. FEINGOLD) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To preclude the admissibility of certain confessions in

criminal cases.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Miranda Reaffirmation

5 Act of 2000’’.

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 18.

7 Section 3501 of title 18, United States Code, is

8 amended—

9 (1) by striking subsections (a) and (b); and
2

•S 2830 IS

1 (2) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and

2 (e) as subsections (a), (b), and (c) respectively.

Æ
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-23-00220-CV

Eric J. Miller, M.D., and The Spine Group, PLLC, Appellants

v.

Central Texas Pain Center, PLLC; PSA Management Company, LLC; PSA Group 

Holdings, LLC; PSA Practice Holdings, PA; PSCT Practice Holdings, PA; Daniel 

Frederick, MD.; Scott Budoff; and Commonview Capital, LLC, Appellees

FROM THE 201ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. D-1-GN-22-005681, THE HONORABLE JESSICA MANGRUM, JUDGE PRESIDING

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

PER CURIAM

Appellants Eric J. Miller, M.D., and The Spine Group, PLLC, have filed a 

suggestion of bankruptcy. See Tex. R. App. P. 8.1. We therefore abate this appeal until a party 

files a motion to reinstate or a motion to sever. See id. R. 8.2, 8.3. Appellants are ordered to 

inform this Court of the resolution of the bankruptcy proceeding or some other event that would 

allow this appeal to be reinstated. Should they fail to provide such notice, the appeal will be 

subject to dismissal for want of prosecution on this Court’s or another party's motion. See id.

R. 42.3(b), (c).

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Theofanis

Bankruptcy

Filed: May 16, 2023
#### C. V. Page, Appellee, v. Mrs. J. J. Peden, Appellant.

LIMITATION OF ACTIONS: Bar Under Foreign Statute. Defendant may not plead tlio bar of a foreign statute when the cause of action sued on accrued "within this state.”

*Appeal from O’Brien District Court.*— WilliaM Hutohinson, Judge.

November 15, 1921.

Action upon an account. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant *appeals.*

Affirmed.

*G. A. Gibson,*for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

Stevens, J.

Appellant, formerly a resident of this state, became a resident of South Dakota in the spring of 1909. In the fall of that year, she returned to Sheldon, Iowa, where appellee, who is a physician, attended her during confinement. It is to recover for these services that this action is prosecuted.

The defense relied upon is the statute of limitations of South Dakota, which is six years, upon an open account. The contention of counsel is that, as this period elapsed between the *471rendition of the services and the commencement of this action, it is barred, tinder the provisions of the South Dakota statute. This position is untenable. Code Section 3452, is as follows:

“When a cause of action has been fully barred by the laws of any country where the defendant has previously resided, such bar shall be the same defense here as though it had arisen under the provisions of this chapter; but this, section shall not apply to causes of action arising within this state.” .

By its plain provisions, this section does not apply to causes of action arising within this state. The services were rendered by plaintiff, and the cause of action arose in this state. It is, therefore, immaterial that the action could not be maintained in South Dakota, because of the bar of the statute. The question is fully settled in this state. *Ross v. Rees,*55 Iowa 296; *Moran v. Moran,*144 Iowa 451; *McNamara v. McAllister,*150 Iowa 243; *Jarl v. Pritchett,*190 Iowa 1268.

The ruling of the court overruling defendant’s motion for new trial must be *sustained.*— Affirmed.

Evans, C. J., Arthur and Faville, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 12.1**
**Section 302 Officer Certification**
I, Sergio Miguel Angel Autrey Maza, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Satélites Mexicanos, S.A. de C.V.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the company and have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the company’s most recent fiscal year that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The company’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and theaudit committee of company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: June 30, 2005     /S/ SERGIO MIGUEL ANGEL AUTREY MAZA
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 China Prosperous Clean Energy Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Wei Wang, Chief Executive 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, to the best of 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 results of operations of the Company.





Date: August 12, 2011

/s/ Wei WangWei Wang

Chief Executive Officer