alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 86-322.

No. 86-328.

#### Crawford Fitting Co. et al. *v.*J. T. Gibbons, Inc.; and Champion International Corp. *v.*International Woodworkers of America, AFL-CIO, CLC, et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, *ante,*p. 983.] Motion of respondents for divided argument granted. Motion of petitioners for divided argument granted.
Docket Number FAA - 2014- 0143 

### Organization Person Contacted **Date** Response **National Business Aircraft Association Eli Cotti**  6/11/12 **Regional Airline Association** 6/11/12 **Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association Robert Hackman**  6/11/12 **ATA M Lo**  **pez** 6/11/12
#### Christina Alburquerque, as Parent and Natural Guardian of Linda Alburquerque, an Incapable Adult, Respondent, v Beautiful Village Associates Redevelopment Co. et al., Defendants, and City of New York et al., Appellants. Linda Alburquerque, an Incapable Adult, by Her Guardian ad Litem Christina Alburquerque, Respondent, v Association for the Help of Retarded Children et al., Appellants. Christina Alburquerque, as Parent and Natural Guardian of Linda Alburquerque, an Incapable Adult, Respondent, v Jane Armika et al., Defendants, and Association for Children with Retarded Mental Development et al., Appellants.

[631 NYS2d 357]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Salvador Collazo, J.), entered on or about July 21, 1994, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by defendants-appellants’ brief, denied their motion for consolidation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly exercised its discretion in denying consolidation of three actions seeking to recover for personal injuries arising out of three separate and distinct incidents. As the IAS Court aptly stated after correctly noting that the only factor of any significance common to the actions is the plaintiff’s identity, a single trial involving 15 defendants implicated for varying, unrelated reasons would complicate the issues. It would lead to jury confusion, and, in the present cir*568cumstances, would also prejudice the prosecution of the action that is at an advanced stage of readiness *(see, Shackleford v Mills,*110 AD2d 630; *Hutton & Co. v Tretiak,*140 AD2d 294; *Nicolla v Nicolla,*128 AD2d 998). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.
**Diflubenzuron Focus**  **Meeting Summary**  **August 22 , 2012**  **1 :00**  **– 2:00**  **pm Objective**  The purpose of the meeting was for members of the Environmental Protection Agenc y Office of Pesticide Programs ’ P esticide Re - evaluation Division (PRD), Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED), Health Effects Division (HED), B iological and Economic Anal ys is Division (BEAD), and Registration Division (RD) to meet with Chemtura Corporation (Chemtura) , a technical registrant for diflubenzuron , to get a better understanding o f the need for and scope of a residential exposure assessment during registration review. **A ttendees**  **Chemtura (via conference call)** : Kevin Donovan, Judy Ball **EPA:** Steven Snyderman (PRD), Avivah Jakob (PRD), Tracy Perry (PRD), John Hebert (RD), Autumn M etzger (RD), Sue Hummel (HED), James Miller (HED), Don Atwood (BEAD), John Faulk ner (BEAD), Faruque Khan (EFED) **Discussion** In response to Agency

questions regarding its diflubenzuron products, Chemtura detailed specific use information and gave a broader understanding of total U . S . usage of these non - agricultural products . The discussion covered : 1) non - agricultural uses , including better characterization of outdoor forest lands, standing water, tree shrub, recreational area, and ornamental plant uses (i .e. , application rates, number of applications, acres treated, and timing of applications) ; and 2 ) the general usage of residential products registered for use on bird ponds, pool tarps, and a s an impregnated wood termiticide . Of particular valu e was the applicator information on the residential uses for the EPA Reg. No. 400 - 543 label (i.e. , bird ponds, fountains, small water gardens, pool tarps, and impregnated wood termite use) . In addition, Chemtura explained its minor use products , including registere d feed - through cattle labels . **Follow -**  **up** Based on the discussion, the Agency concluded that a residential handler and post - application exposure assessment is needed in registration review. EPA will continue to work with Chemtura and other diflubenzuron registrants to clarify labels.
Order entered November 2, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 01273
- CR ANTONIO (TONY) RODRI GUEZ, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 331st District Court

Travis County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. D
- 1
- DC
- 84
- 075577



### O RDER On October 30, 2018, the Court received notification of substitution of counsel. We
DIRECT the Clerk to REMOVE Don Morehart and LIST Shannon Hooks as counsel for

app ellant. All future correspondence should be sent to Shannon Hooks, 6910 Hart Lane #510, Austin, Texas 78731. The record has been filed. Appellant’s brief is due November 26, 2018.
/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Marine Aircraft Group 36 Proves They Are Ready to Respond at a Moment’s Notice During No-Notice Drill

By 1st Lt. Tess LaBossiere1st Marine Aircraft Wing

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More
#### JOHN COCHRAN vs. JAMES R. WOOD.

Where a defendant on an appeal from the judgment of the County Court, gave but one surety, the surety cannot on the judgment being affirmed in the higher Court, object to a judgment against himself, on the ground that the Statute requires two sureties on an appeal from a Justice.

The sureties are required for the benefit of the plaintiff, and he' may dispense with them in whole or in part, at his option.

The case of *Arrcnton*v. *Jordan,*4 Hawks. 28, cited and approved.

Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Anson County at the Spring Term 1847, his Honor Judge Battle, presiding.

*216The plaintiff recovered a judgment in the County Court against Wood, who appealed and entered into bond with Waddell as his surety. In the Superior Court the plaintiff again recovered, and then moved for judgment against Waddell on the appeal bond ; which the latter opposed on the ground, that there was but one surety, whereas the statute requires “ two sufficient sureties.” But the Court gave judgment for the plaintiff, and Waddell appealed to this Court.

*Winston*and *Strange,*for the plaintiff

*Mendenhall,*for the defendant.

Ruffih, I.

An appeal bond is required for the security

of the Appellee; and for his better security, the statute provides that there shall be “ two sureties.” But as the bond is intended for the benefit of the appellee, it is entirely competent for him to renounce it, either wholly or in parti It was upon this maxim, that it was held, as far back as *Dr. Wm. Dreiory’s case,*cited 10 Rep. 100, in debt on a bail bond to the sheriff, that the bond was- good, though given by one surety, and the statute used plural words. The same point was determined here in *Arrenton*v. *Jordan,*4 Hawks 28. That case held further, that a *scire facias*would lie on such a bond; and thus established, that the principle extends to all remedies, as well those under the statute as those at common law. Now, the language of the 69th section of the Act of 1771, ch. 115, respecting bail bonds, is precisely the same as- that of the 75th section respecting appeal bonds, each requiring the bond, “with two sufficient sureties.” The reasoning and decision of *Arrenton*v. *Jordan*is.therefore in point here. The terms, in which the sureties are to be bound, cannot, indeed, be substantially varied; or, if they are, the obligee cannot entitle himself to the remedy of the statute, but must get on as well as he can at common law. But an objection, founded solely on the number of *217sureties, cannot impair the obligation of the bond, or impede any remedy on it; because the obligee though he might, is not bound to, insist on the provisions of the Act in his favor, being strictly observed in that respect.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Application of TRACE V5.0 P2 to Natural Circulation Reactor Safety Analysis (NUREG/IA-0418)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0418 (PDF - 1.38 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** February 2012**Date Published:** October 2012

**Prepared by:** FENG Jinjun, CHAI Guohan, SHI Junying, ZHOU Kefeng

Nuclear and Radiation Safety Centre Ministry of Environmental Protection 54, Honglian Nancun, Haidian District Beijing, 100082, CHINA

A. Calvo, NRC Project Manager

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange Under the Thermal-Hydraulic Code Applications and Maintenance Program (CAMP)

**Published by:** Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The purpose of this work is to study the behavior of natural circulation reactor under Accident scenario using the TRACE (TRAC/RELAP Advanced Computational Engine) code. The work is divided into five parts:

The first part is TRACE model establishment. SNAP (Symbolic Nuclear Analysis Program) program was used to facilitate system modeling work. Important components such as core and heat exchanger were modeled respectively. These components were tested separately and results were compared with design data to check the accuracy. Key parameters were indentified and properly adjusted to refine the model further. All of the components were incorporated together to build up the integrated TRACE model of natural circulation reactor.

The second part is steady state calculation. Steady state of full power operation was simulated by TRACE code and calculation results were compared with design data. Hydraulic frictions were adjusted to keep calculated and designed primary side natural circulation mass flow as close as possible. The adjustment work was iterated until all of key parameters were acceptable.

The third part is transient calculation. The Accident scenario “Loss of Main Feed Water” was simulated in this part. Restart case of accident scenario was prepared based on the steady state TRACE model established previously. The transient calculation results showed that safety goal was achieved under the assumed accident scenario.

The forth part is sensitivity analysis. Sensitivity analysis of main feed water flow rate and reactor power to primary side natural circulation flow was performed respectively. Special phenomenon of natural circulation flow acceleration due to “loss of feed water” was understood better though the sensitivity analysis.

The last part is accident scenario animation. SNAP was used to create the animation of the “Loss of Main Feed Water” Accident scenario. Better understanding of the calculated physical phenomena and transient process was obtained via animation demonstration.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNews Releases1997

# Note to Editors: NRC Received Eight Reports from ACRS

----

----

No. 97-187

December 19, 1997

NOTE TO EDITORS:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has received eight reports from its Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. The reports, in the form of letters, provide comments on:

-- Proposed Generic Letter, "Augmented Inspection of Pressurized-Water Reactor Class 1 High-Pressure Safety Injection Piping."

-- Draft Regulatory Guide DG-DG-1071, "Standard Format and Content for Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report."

-- Proposed Final Revision 1 to NUREG-1022, "Event Reporting Guidelines 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73."

-- Proposed Generic Letter on Interim Guidance for Updating Final Safety Analysis Reports.

-- Year 2000 Computer Issue.

-- Proposed Final Regulatory guide 1.174 and Standard Review Plan Chapter 19 for Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation.

-- Proposed Revisions to 10 CFR 50.59 (Changes, Tests and Experiments).

-- Credit for Containment Overpressure to Provide Assurance of Sufficient Net Positive Suction Head for Emergency Core Cooling and Containment Heat Removal Pumps.

Copies of the reports are available through the NRC's Office of Public Affairs, the NRC's Internet Homepage and the Public Document Room in Washington, D.C. To access the letters on the NRC Internet Homepage use the "Search" function to look for "447th."

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

          In connection with the Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q of Kensey Nash
Corporation (the "Company") for the three months ended September 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Wendy F. DiCicco, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
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 section 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: November 14, 2002          /s/ Wendy F. DiCicco, CPA
                                                 -----------------------------
                                                 Wendy F. DiCicco, CPA
                                                 Chief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 222 (Monday, November 18, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 90592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-26848]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2024-0878]

Special Local Regulations; San Diego Parade of Lights, San Diego, 
CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the San Diego Parade of Lights 
special local regulations on the waters of San Diego Bay, California on 
December 8, 2024, and December 15, 2024. These special local 
regulations are necessary to provide for the safety of the 
participants, crew, spectators, sponsor vessels, and general users of 
the waterway. During the enforcement period, persons and vessels are 
prohibited from anchoring, blocking, loitering, or impeding within this 
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector San 
Diego or a designated representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 will be enforced from 5 p.m. 
through 8 p.m. on December 8, 2024, and from 5 p.m. through 8 p.m. on 
December 15, 2024, for Item 5 in Table 1 of Section 100.1101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this 
publication of enforcement, call or email Lieutenant Shelley Turner, 
Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; telephone 
(619) 278-7656, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the special 
local regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 for the San Diego Parade of Lights 
in San Diego Bay, CA in 33 CFR 100.1101, Table 1, Item 5 of that 
section from 5 p.m. until 8 p.m. on December 8, 2024, and on December 
15, 2024. This enforcement action is being taken to provide for the 
safety of life on navigable waterways during the event. The Coast 
Guard's regulation for recurring marine events in the San Diego Captain 
of the Port Zone identifies the regulated entities and area for this 
event. During the enforcement periods and under the provisions of 33 
CFR 100.1101, persons and vessels are prohibited from anchoring, 
blocking, loitering, or impeding within this regulated area, unless 
authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated 
representative. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, 
State, or local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.
    In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal 
Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with 
advance notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to 
Mariners, marine information broadcasts, and local advertising by the 
event sponsor.

P.C. Dill,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2024-26848 Filed 11-15-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
```
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

VINSON T. BLOCKER

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 18

- 16

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

.

________________________________/

Opinion filed May 18, 2018

3.850 Appeal fro m the Circuit Court for Orange County

, Robert J. Egan , Judge.

Vinson T. Blocker, Sneads, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the summa ry denial of all issues raised by Vinson T. Blocker

(“ Appellant ”) in hi s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 amended m otion for

postco nviction relief , save one. Under the specific facts of this case, Appellant’s dual

convictions for dealing in stolen property and pet it theft are improper. S ee Hall v. State

,

826 So. 2d 268, 271 (Fla. 2002) (finding that section 812.025, Florida Statutes, prohibits

a trial court from adjudicating a defendant guilty of both theft and dealing in stolen property

in connection with one sch eme or course of conduct) ; Shearer v. State , 582 So. 2d 28,2

29 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (concluding that the petit theft of a camera and the dealing in

stolen property of the camera committed on the same day arose out of the same course

of conduct or scheme ).

W e next address the remedy. Where, as here, the jury is properly instructed under

section 812.025 but nevertheless returns dual guilty verdicts for both theft and dealing in

stolen property that are contrary to section 812.025, we conclude that the appropr iate

remedy is to vacate the conviction for the lesser offense of petit theft. Cf. Blackmon v.

State , 121 So. 3d 535, 548

– 49, 549 n .18 (Fla. 2013) ( holding that where the jury was not

properly instructed under section 812.025 but the defendant failed to request a proper

instruction or to otherwise preserve the error for appellate review and the jury returns dual

guilty verdicts for both theft and dealing in stolen property that a re con trary to section

812.025, the proper remedy is vacating the conviction for the lesser offense).

Lastly

, based upon the trial court’s findings in the denial order that it would have

imposed the same sentences for Appellant’s other convictions regardless of the

“negligible” change in th e scoresheet resulting if the petit theft conviction w ere vacated,

we den y Appellant’s request to be resentenced on his other convictions

.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court to vacate Appellant’s

conviction and sentence for petit theft . W e affirm the postconviction court’ s order in all

othe r r espe c ts.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with directions.

PALMER

, BERGER and LAMBERT , JJ., concur.
2/26/2012

Doug Dickey

Apex Helicopters LLC

2810 Silhouette Bay Dr.

Pearland, TX 77584

Docket Management Facility

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.

West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140

Washington, DC 20590

RE: Petition for Exemption of 14 CFR part 120

To Whom It May Concern:

Apex Helicopters LLC (“Apex”) seeks a petition for exemption of 14 CFR part 120. The 

mailing address and contact information for Apex is set forth below:

Apex Helicopters LLC

2810 Silhouette Bay Dr.

Pearland, TX 77584

Email: doug@apexhelicopters.net

Telephone: 832.317.5426

Specifically, Apex seeks exemption from 14 CFR part 120 (“part 120”) so that it does not have 

to implement a separate drug and alcohol testing program for its operations under 14 CFR part 

135 (“part 135”). Apex already has a drug and alcohol testing program in place for its air tour 

operations under 14 CFR part 91.147 (“part 91”). 

As part of its drug and alcohol testing program under part 91, Apex randomly tests four pilots. 

Apex is currently under certifications for its part 135 single pilot operating certificate. Since this 

will be a single pilot operation, there will only one safety sensitive employee. The pilot that will 

operate for Apex under part 135 is also part of Apex’s operations under part 91. Thus, that pilot 

is already randomly tested under Apex’s drug and alcohol testing program for part 91. 

Moreover, the company that administers Apex’s drug and alcohol testing program, Norton 

Medical Industries, has flagged Apex to ensure that it randomly tests Apex’s part 135 pilot once 

a year. Accordingly, 100% of Apex’s part 135 pilots are tested every year. This provides a 

higher level of safety than what is required by part 120, namely, that 25% of part 135 pilots are

tested every year. In addition, granting of this exemption would be in the public interest because 

it would eliminate the unnecessary duplication of testing and associated cost.
Below is a brief description for publishing in the Federal Register:

Apex Helicopters LLC seeks an exemption from 14 CFR part 120. Under this 

exemption, Apex Helicopters LLC will not have to implement a separate drug and 

alcohol testing program for its 14 CFR part 135 operations in lieu of its drug and alcohol 

testing program for its 14 CFR part 91.147 operations.

Thank you for your consideration.

Regards,

Doug Dickey

General Manager

Apex Helicopters LLC