alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2490-031]
 On August 30, 2022, the Green Mountain Power Corporation filed a minor relicense application for the 0.5-megawatt Taftsville Hydroelectric Project No. 2490 (project). The project is located on the Ottauquechee River in the Village of Taftsville, in Windsor County, Vermont. No Federal or Tribal lands occur within or adjacent to the project boundary. In accordance with the Commission's regulations, on June 12, 2024, Commission staff issued a notice that the project was ready for environmental analysis (REA Notice). Based on the information in the record, staff does not anticipate that licensing the project would constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Therefore, staff intends to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) on the application to relicense the project.[1] The EA will be issued and circulated for review by all interested parties. All comments filed on the EA will be analyzed by staff and considered in the Commission's final licensing decision. The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, environmental justice communities, Tribal members, and others, access publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or 
                    *OPP@ferc.gov.* The application will be processed according to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made as appropriate. Milestone
Target dateCommission issues EA
August 25, 2025.
 Any questions regarding this notice may be directed to David Gandy at (202) 502-8560 or 
                    *david.gandy@ferc.gov.* Dated: October 7, 2024. Debbie-Anne A. Reese, Acting Secretary.


# Footnotes

1.
    
                         In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations, the unique identification number for documents relating to this environmental review is EAXX-019-20-000-1728292340. 40 CFR 1501.5(c)(4) (2024). Back to Citation


[FR Doc. 2024-23664 Filed 10-11-24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), 

this Memorandum Decision shall not be 

regarded as precedent or cited before 

any court except for the purpose of 

establishing the defense of res judicata, 

collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE:

KRISTINA J. JACOBUCCI GREGORY F. ZOELLER

LaPorte, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana

KARL M. SCHARNBERG

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

JUAQUIN DIAZ-DELREAL, )

)

Appellant-Defendant, )

)

vs. ) No. 46A03-1404-CR-130

)

STATE OF INDIANA, )

)

Appellee-Plaintiff. )

APPEAL FROM THE LAPORTE CIRCUIT COURT

The Honorable Thomas J. Alevizos, Judge

Cause No. 46C01-1302-FD-729

January 12, 2015

MEMORANDUM DECISION ON REHEARING - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

SULLIVAN, Senior Judge
2

Juaquin Diaz-Delreal has filed a petition for rehearing from this Court’s 

memorandum decision affirming Diaz-Delreal’s sentence, but reversing and remanding the 

matter to the trial court to vacate the judgment of conviction as a Class D felony and enter 

a judgment of conviction as a Class A misdemeanor, as explicitly provided for in the plea 

agreement. See Diaz-Delreal v. State, No. 46A03-1404-CR-130 (Ind. Ct. App. October 

27, 2014). We grant Diaz-Delreal’s petition to clarify a factual issue, but otherwise affirm 

our opinion in all respects.

Diaz-Delreal contends that we misstated the record with respect to his criminal 

history in our review of his sentencing argument. In particular, he challenges our statement 

that his criminal history consisted of a prior adjudication for what would be battery if 

committed by an adult, contending instead that he was satisfactorily released from 

supervised probation while the matter pended under advisement. Assuming that DiazDelreal’s representation of the record is correct, we affirm his sentence nonetheless.

An appellant bears the burden of showing both prongs of the Appellate Rule 7(B) 

inquiry in order to obtain a revision of his sentence. Anderson v. State, 989 N.E.2d 823, 

827 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). We noted in our opinion that Diaz-Delreal’s criminal history 

was not among the worst. However, the focus of our review concerned the nature of the 

offense. The victim of Diaz-Delreal’s criminal recklessness almost died from his injuries. 

He suffered extreme pain from skull and orbital bone fractures and now no longer has 

sensation in the jaw area. On this ground alone, namely the nature of the offense, we 

conclude that Diaz-Delreal has failed to meet his burden of establishing that his sentence 

is inappropriate. 
3

Aside from this factual clarification, we affirm our original opinion in all respects. 

Affirmed. 

MAY, J., and BROWN, J., concur.
---

Exhibit 99.12

CONSENT OF ENGINEER

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 on the Midwest Uranium Deposit Mineral Resource and Mineral
Reserve Estimates, Saskatchewan, Canada dated June 1, 2005, as amended on
February 14, 2006, 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 12, 2015

/s/ Luke EvansLuke Evans, M.Sc., P.Eng.
Roscoe Postle Associates Inc.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AT DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS
OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             891
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   93,102
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    121,081
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,397
<PP&E>                                         154,939
<DEPRECIATION>                                (58,063)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,472,345
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,677,199
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,997
<OTHER-SE>                                   (282,713)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,472,345
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,939,472
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,436,440
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,342,231
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,048
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (798,645)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (798,645)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (798,645)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 99-50883

_____________________ DOMINGO MARTINEZ, Petitioner-Appellant,
versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee.

_______________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (D.C. No. A-96-CV-695)

_______________________________________________________ May 4, 2000 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Our question is whether under the evidence, considered in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Domingo Valdez Martinez possessed at least 400 grams in aggregate weight of methamphetamine, including adulterants and dilutants. See Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307 (1979).2

The complaint is that the testimony indicates that no more than 260.5 grams of the methamphetamine was pure and that the additives should not be counted. The answer to that complaint is that the state produced expert testimony that appellant had more than 400 grams of methamphetamine in final and useable form. The Texas court upheld the verdict as supported by the evidence. No federal law is implicated and habeas corpus must be denied. AFFIRMED.
From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Thomas Gillis/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, George

Faison/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Marc Thomas/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

 Date: 11/29/2011 11:24 AM 

 Subject: FW: E.O. 12866 Meeting on Boilers MACT and CISWI Rules 

 

Hi all,

Attached are the handouts from the meeting this morning.

Regards,

Cortney

-----Original Appointment-----

From: Echols, Mabel E.

Subject: E.O. 12866 Meeting on Boilers MACT and CISWI Rules

When: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 9:30 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern

Time (US & Canada).

Where: Room 10103 NEOB

This meeting was requested by Khary Cauthen, API.

(See attached file: 2060-AR13_2011_11_29_API_Handout2.pdf)(See attached file: 2060-

AR13_2011_11_29_API_Handout1.pdf)
**EXHIBIT32**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 USC, SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

          In connection with this quarterly report of Amiworld, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the six month period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, 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 our knowledge:

 

|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Rule 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. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Dated: August 19, 2009

s/Mamoru Saito                                        

Mamoru Saito, Chief Executive Officer

 

Dated: August 19, 2009
|   | (1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Falconridge Oil Technologies Corp. for the period ended August 31, 2014 (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 Falconridge Oil Technologies Corp. |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: October 23, 2014 |   |                                                           |
|-----------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|
|                        |   |                                                           |
|                        |   |                                                           |
|                        |   | /s/ Alfred Morra                                               |   |   |
|                        |   | Alfred Morra                                                   |
|                        |   | Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Director                |
|                        |   | (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) |
|                        |   | Falconridge Oil Technologies Corp.                             |

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 September 30, 2013

h0923

Order 

Clerk

September 30, 2013

147223 & (19)(20)(21)(22)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 147223

COA: 314585

Wayne CC: 99-003949-FC

DAVID KENDALE LAMB,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 7, 2013 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s motion 

for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G). The motions to remand for 

various evidentiary hearings are all DENIED.
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AND EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(b)
AND 15d-14(b)


(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, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”), does
hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:





The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 of the
Company fully complies, in all material respects, with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the
information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Dated:
      November 16, 2009
                  By:
                  /s/
      Cheng ZhengName:
      Cheng ZhengTitle:
      Chief Executive OfficerDated:
      November 16, 2009
                  By:
                  /s/
      Jacky LamName:
      Jacky LamTitle:
      Principal Financial Officer
---

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Ming Zhu, Chief Financial Officer of Lake
Victoria Mining Company, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | the 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
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                        

|Dated: November 22, 2010 | By: | /s/
      Ming Zhu                        
|------------------------ | --- | ------------------------------------------
|                         |     | Ming Zhu                                  
|                         |     | Chief Financial Officer                   
|                         |     | (Principal Financial Officer and Principal
|                         |     | Accounting Officer)                       

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Lake Victoria
Mining Company, Inc. and will be retained by Lake Victoria Mining Company, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

---
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 95-60646

Summary Calendar

_____________________

BRYCE DALLAS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

COPIAH COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS;

TOMMY JACKSON; KENNETH McLENDON,

Sheriff of Copiah County; MELVIN

CHANDLER, Jail Administrator;

JOE DOE, Present Jail Administrator;

ERVIN KELLY, Member of the Copiah

County Board of Supervisors; 

TONY SMITH, Member of the Copiah

County Board of Supervisors; JOHN M.

HALL, Member of the Copiah County

Board of Supervisors; WINFRED HAMMOCK,

Member of the Copiah County Board of

Supervisors,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:92-CV-661-BN

_________________________________________________________________

October 13, 1997

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Bryce Dallas appeals the district court’s judgment for the

defendants in his civil rights suit. He argues that his conditions
-2-

of confinement in a county jail were unconstitutional, that the

jail failed to protect him from attacks by other inmates, and that

he was denied adequate medical care. We have reviewed the record

and AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal for essentially the same

reasons set forth by the district court. Dallas v. Copiah County

Bd. of Supervisors, No. 3:92-CV-661-BN (S.D. Miss. Sept. 29, 1995).

A F F I R M E D.
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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 Encore Energy Partners LP (“ENP”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Richard A. Robert, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Encore Energy Partners GP LLC, the general partner of ENP, 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 ENP.











Date:  May 10, 2011                                                                  /s/ Richard A. Robert


Richard A. Robert


Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)


of Encore Energy Partners GP LLC, the General Partner


of Encore Energy Partners LP
[No. 24643.

Department Two.

November 2, 1933.]

#### Chin Shu Num, *Appellant,*v. M. Yamamoto, *Respondents.**1*

*L. B. Schwellenbach*and *Fred B. Lysons,*for appellant.

*Shank, Belt & Rode,*for respondent.

1

Reported in 26 P. (2d) 391.

Holcomb, J.—

Appellant brought this suit to recover damages for the death of his minor son, less than seven years of age, as the result of being struck by the automobile of respondent on the highway between Seattle and Tacoma. From a judgment on the verdict of the jury in favor of respondent, after a trial in which the evidence was entirely conflicting, and the denial by the trial court of a new. trial, this appeal results. The sole errors urged are in denying the motion for a new trial and in entering judgment in favor of respondent.

Nothing but questions of fact are involved on this appeal. No errors in instructions or in the admission or rejection of evidence are complained of. Although appellant attempts to demonstrate that the evidence on behalf of respondent as to the manner in which the accident happened, and the physical facts, show that it was improbable or impossible for it to have happened in such manner, those were questions for the jury, which resolved them in favor of respondent. The facts as stated by respondent, as shown by the maps and plats in the record, upon being examined, disclose that it was perfectly probable and possible for the accident to have happened as contended by him. The alleged physical facts amount to nothing more than conclusions based upon computations by appellant, and not strictly physical facts. The jury had the undoubted right to accept the version of respondent and at least one entirely disinterested witness, and another not so disinterested, who corroborated respondent as to the manner in which the regrettable accident happened.

There being no error in the record shown to have influenced the verdict of the jury, and the court having exercised its discretion in refusing a new trial, the judgment must be affirmed.

Beals, C. J., Tolman, Blake, and Geeaghtt, JJ., concur.