alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 46336

STATE OF IDAHO
,

Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

MATTHEW EDWARD LANDERS
,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Filed: May 6, 2019

Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
OPINION AND SHALL NOT
BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, Canyon County. Hon. Gene A. Petty , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of twenty years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for sexual abuse of a minor under sixteen, affirmed

.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Reed P. Anderson , Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorn ey General; Lori A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________
Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LORELLO, Judge;

a nd BRAILSFORD, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Matthew Edward Landers pled guilty to sexual abuse of a child under sixteen . I.C. § 18

-

1506

. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court

sentenced Landers to a unified term of twenty years, with a minimum period of confinement of

five years

. Landers appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both o ur standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and2 need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

- 15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lop ez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.

1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722 , 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Landers ’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

DEANNA KEENE,

Petitioner

v.

PAUL B. KIRSCH, M.D. AND 

FOSTERBROOK MEDICAL 

ASSOCIATES, P.C.,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 215 WAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 21st day of November, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
EXHIBIT 24.3

POWER OF ATTORNEY

Know all by these presents, that I, the undersigned, do hereby appoint Mike
Kinney and Robert E. Brummels, or either of them, as my attorney-in-fact with full power of substitution, to execute in their respective names, individually and in my capacity as director:

(i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the 2007 Annual Report) of Husker Ag, LLC and any and all
amendments thereto, and to file the 2007 Annual Report, any and all such amendments, and exhibits and documents thereto required in connection therewith with the Securities and Exchange Commission and granting unto each attorney-in-fact and any
substitute, full power and authority to do and to perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in connection therewith, as fully as I might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said
attorneys-in-fact and their substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof; and

(ii) the Rule 13e-3 Transaction
Statement Under Section 13(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on Schedule 13E-3 (the Schedule 13E-3) of Husker Ag, LLC and any and all amendments thereto, and to file the Schedule 13E-3, any and all such amendments, and
exhibits and documents thereto required in connection therewith with the Securities and Exchange Commission and granting unto each attorney-in-fact and any substitute, full power and authority to do and to perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done in connection therewith, as fully as I might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and their substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24thday of March, 2008.



/s/ Stanley GybergStanley Gyberg




|                  |  |   |  |    
|----------------- |  | - |  | ---
|STATE OF NEBRASKA |  | ) |  |    
|                  |  | ) |  | ss.
|COUNTY OF PIERCE  |  | ) |  |    

On this 24thday of March, 2008, before me, a Notary public qualified for said County, personally came Stanley Gyberg, known to me to be the identical person who signed
the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed.



|       |  |  |  |  |  |                                 
|------ |  |  |  |  |  | --------------------------------
|       |  |  | 
|       |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Kristine Wacker             
|{Seal} |  |  |  |  |  | Notary Public                   
|       |  |  | 
|       |  |  |  |  |  | My commission expires: 2-28-2010
### combustionsurvey
- Fw: Additional Information and Data Related to CO Emissions
- Biomass

Stoker/Sloped Grate/Other Subcategory

-----Forwarded by Brian Shrager/RTP/USEPA/US on 07/ 16/2011 03:37PM ----- To: Brian Shrager/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA From: "Pinkerton, John" <JPinkerton@NCASI.org> Date: 07/15/2011 04:36PM Cc: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Peter Tsirigo tis/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Jim Eddinger/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Hunt, Tim" <Tim_Hunt@afan dpa.org>, "Jain, Ashok" <ajain@NCASI.org>, "Someshwar, Arun (SRC)" <ArunSom eshwar@NCASI.org> Subject: Additional Information and Data Related to CO Emissions - Biomass Stoker/Sloped Grate/Other Subcategory (See attached file: Shrager-July15.pdf) (See attached file: CO-Stoker Biomass 3-hr NCASI pa per 7-15-11.pdf) (See attached file: CO-Stoker Biomass Alternative L imits- NCASI paper 7-15-11.pdf)

Brian,
Please see attached letter and associated documents . Should these also be submitted to the Boiler MAC T docket or will EPA add them at some point? Sincerely,
John Pinkerton

John Pinkerton

NCASI National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, In c.

P.O. Box 13318 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3318 

### From: Brian Shrager <Shrager.Brian@epamail.epa.gov> To: <combustionsurvey@erg.com> Date: 7/16/2011 3:38 PM Subject: Fw: Additional Information and Data Related to CO Emissions - Biomass Stoker/Sloped

Grate/Other Subcategory Attachments: Shrager-July15.pdf; CO-Stoker Biomass 3-hr NCASI paper 7-15-11.pdf; CO-S toker

Biomass Alternative Limits

- NCASI paper 7

- 15

- 11.pdf Page 1 of 2

8/2/2011 file://C:\Documents and Settings\GGibson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpw ise\4E21B05EDO

...Telephone: 919-941-6406

Fax: 919-941-6401 Deliveries: 3106 East NC Highway 54, Research Tria ngle Park, NC 27709

Contact publications@ncasi.org if you do not want t o receive future NCASI communications



### = Page 2 of 2

8/2/2011 file://C:\Documents and Settings\GGibson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpw ise\4E21B05EDO

...
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

ROBERT FENNELL,

Petitioner

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 44 EM 2017

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 31st day of May

, 2017, the Application for Leave to File Original

Process is GRANTED

, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Extraordinary Relief

is DENIED

.
<PAGE>
Exhibit  23.1




               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


Janel  World  Trade,  Ltd.
150-14  132nd  Avenue
Jamaica,  NY  11434

Gentlemen:

We  have  issued our report dated November 18, 2002 (except for Note 13(b) which
is dated December 12, 2002) accompanying the financial statements of Janel World
Trade, Ltd. and subsidiaries (formerly C and N Corp.) contained in the Form 10-K
under  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We consent to the use of
the  aforementioned report in the Form 10-K under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934,  as  amended,  and  to the use of our name as it appears in Item 9 of Form
10-K.


                                             /s/  Paritz  &  Company,  P.A.




Hackensack,  New  Jersey
December  27,  2002


<PAGE>
No. 82-5684.

#### Martin *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1733 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1733

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 13, 2017

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To direct the Secretary of Energy to review and update a report on the 
     energy and environmental benefits of the re-refining of used 
                            lubricating oil.

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

SECTION 1. ENERGY SAVINGS FROM LUBRICATING OIL.

    Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary of Energy, in cooperation with the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency and the Director of the Office of 
Management and Budget, shall--
            (1) review and update the report prepared pursuant to 
        section 1838 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005;
            (2) after consultation with relevant Federal, State, and 
        local agencies and affected industry and stakeholder groups, 
        update data that was used in preparing that report; and
            (3) prepare and submit to Congress a coordinated Federal 
        strategy to increase the beneficial reuse of used lubricating 
        oil, that--
                    (A) is consistent with national policy as 
                established pursuant to section 2 of the Used Oil 
                Recycling Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-463); and
                    (B) addresses measures needed to--
                            (i) increase the responsible collection of 
                        used oil;
                            (ii) disseminate public information 
                        concerning sustainable reuse options for used 
                        oil; and
                            (iii) promote sustainable reuse of used oil 
                        by Federal agencies, recipients of Federal 
                        grant funds, entities contracting with the 
                        Federal Government, and the general public.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 12, 2017.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsBrochures Prepared by NRC Staff

# Frequently Asked Questions About License Applications for New Nuclear Power Reactors (NUREG/BR-0468)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG BR-0468:
        Cover through Chapter 2 (PDF – 20.70 MB)
Chapters 3 through 6 (PDF – 28.57 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** November 2009**Date Published:** December 2009

Office of New Reactors

## Abstract

With the number of applications for new licenses for commercial nuclear power plants increasing, the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) realized that members of the public had similar questions related to the environmental review and licensing process. Therefore, this report uses a question-and-answer format to respond to frequently asked questions (FAQs) about these issues for new commercial nuclear power reactors. The questions were taken from a variety of sources, including public comments on the new licensing process, written inquiries to the NRC, and questions from informal discussions with NRC staff. The staff has attempted to provide answers in a clear and nontechnical form.

In addition to answering the FAQs, this document describes the NRC's licensing process, the types of reviews conducted on applications for new nuclear power plants, and the types of licenses an applicant can seek. It also describes the stages and issues examined during the environmental review, including the consideration of alternative sites, reviews of severe accident mitigation alternatives, and the processes of eventual decommissioning. Although this document focuses on the environmental review process, it also briefly addresses general questions about the impacts and risks of nuclear power. These topics include waste management, radiological safety, storage and disposal of waste, the effects of radiation on human health, and security concerns. Finally, the document covers questions about public involvement in the licensing and review process and how members of the public can obtain more information about the process.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
Exhibit 32.1


                       Cancer Capital Corp.

                 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                      18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned officer of Cancer Capital Corp. certifies pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

..      the annual report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended
       December 31, 2005 fully complies 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-KSB fairly presents, in all
       material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
       the Company.



Date:   March 27, 2006
                                   /s/ John W. Peters
                                   ___________________________________
                                   John W. Peters
                                   Principal Executive Officer
                                   Principal Financial Officer
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# RELAP5 and TRACE Simulation of Hot Leg Break LOCA Experiment on LSTF (NUREG/IA-0494)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0494 (PDF – 4.94 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** November 2017**Date Published:** December 2018

**Prepared by:** Andrej Prošek

Jožef Stefan Institute Jamova cesta 39  Sl-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Kirk Tien, NRC Project Manager

Division of Systems Analysis Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

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

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

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Confidence in the computational tools and establishment of their validity for a given application depends on the assessment. The purpose of this study is therefore to independently assess the TRACE computer code for hot leg break test. A pressurized water reactor (PWR) hot leg break loss-of-coolant accident experiment SB-HL-02 was performed on the Large Scale Test Facility (LSTF) in the Rig of Safety Assessment-IV (ROSA-IV) program with a break size equivalent to 10% cold leg cross sectional area. For calculations the RELAP5/MOD3.3 Patch 5 and TRACE V5.0 Patch 4 computer codes were used. The RELAP5/MOD2 input model was obtained within the framework of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Coordinated Research Project (CRP) on Evaluation of Uncertainties in Best Estimate Accident Analysis (2006-2010). The obtained input model was first adapted to RELAP5/MOD3.3 and then converted to TRACE using Symbolic Nuclear Analysis Package (SNAP), requiring also manual corrections. The LSTF simulates a Westinghouse-type four-loop 3423 MW (thermal) PWR by a full-height and 1/48 volumetrically-scaled two-loop system. The results suggest that TRACE calculation is comparable to RELAP5 calculations and that results obtained by both codes agree well with the experimental data. Finally, it was also demonstrated that advanced SNAP graphical user interface has the capabilities to graphically present complex phenomena like collapsed liquid level distribution in the loop, helping to understand natural circulation flow in different regimes.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
March 28, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

PARTNERS IN BUILDING, L.P., Appellant

NO. 14-12-00123-CV V.

DARLEEN EURE, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the order in favor of appellee Darleen Eure, 

signed, October 10, 2011, was heard on the transcript of the record. The record 

shows that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to render this order. We therefore 

order the trial court’s order of October 10, 2011, VACATED, and we order this 

appeal DISMISSED. We order appellee DARLEEN EURE to pay all costs 

incurred in this appeal. We further order this decision certified below for 

observance.
**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**

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Pharmaceutical Product Development, Inc. (“PPD”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Fredric N. Eshelman, Chief Executive Officer of PPD, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities 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 PPD as of, andfor, the periods presented in the Report. 

Date: August 3, 2006
exhibit10201212011.htm




EXHIBIT 10.2







AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO WARRANT TO PURCHASE STOCK












THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO WARRANT TO PURCHASE STOCK is made as of January 21, 2011 by and between SVB Financial Group (“Holder”) and Wireless Ronin Technologies, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”).







WHEREAS, Holder is the holder, by assignment from Silicon Valley Bank (“Bank”), of that certain Warrant to Purchase Stock dated as of March 18, 2010 issued by the Company to Bank (the “Warrant”); and







WHEREAS, in connection with the execution and delivery of that certain First Loan Modification Agreement, of even date herewith, to that certain Loan and Security Agreement dated March 18, 2010, between the Company and Bank, and as additional consideration to Bank for its agreements therein, the parties hereto desire to amend the Warrant in the manner set forth below;







NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:







1.           Warrant Amendment.  The Warrant is hereby amended such that the Warrant Price (as defined in the Warrant) shall be $1.378 as of the date hereof, subject to adjustment from time to time hereafter in accordance with the provisions of the Warrant.







2.           No Other Amendments.  Except as amended hereby, the Warrant shall remain in full force and effect as originally written.







3.           Governing Law.  This Amendment No. 1 shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to its conflict of laws provisions.












[Remainder of page left blank intentionally; signature page follows]






  





  











  













IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment No. 1 to Warrant to Purchase Stock as of the date first above written.












WIRELESS RONIN TECHNOLOGIES, INC.












By: /s/ Darin P. McAreavey         


Name: Darin P. McAreavey


Title: Senior Vice-President & Chief Financial Officer












SVB FINANCIAL GROUP












By: /s/ Michael Kruse


Name: Michael Kruse


Title: Treasurer
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2008 to 12/31/2008Page 78 of 22605/29/2009 10:01:12

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Harris 1 Docket (050- 00400)

Human-System Interface & Environmnt / IR170 - HSI or information availability / quality LTA H - Health Physics H - Health Physics 

170 - HSI or information availability / quality LTA H - Health Physics H - Health Physics 170 - HSI or information availability / quality LTA I - Instrumentation & Control M - Maintenance / Repair 170 - HSI or information availability / quality LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

420

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Procedures & Reference Document / IR111 - Procedure / reference document technical content M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

111 - Procedure / reference document technical content M - Mechanical T - Testing 

210

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Problem Identification & Resolution / IR146 - Evaluation LTA G - Engineering G - Design 

147 - Individual corrective action LTA I - Instrumentation & Control M - Maintenance / Repair 147 - Individual corrective action LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 150 - Programmatic deficiency M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

420

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Work Planning & Practices / IR182 - Work package quality LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

182 - Work package quality LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 183 - Pre-job activities LTA E - Electrical M - Maintenance / Repair 183 - Pre-job activities LTA O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 184 - Tag outs LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 185 - Procedural adherence LTA O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 185 - Procedural adherence LTA O - Operations S - Surveillance 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements I - Instrumentation & Control M - Maintenance / Repair 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements I - Instrumentation & Control S - Surveillance 
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2008 to 12/31/2008Page 79 of 22605/29/2009 10:01:12

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Harris 1 Docket (050- 00400)

Work Planning & Practices / IR187 - Action implementation LTA G - Engineering G - Design 

1050

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Total Items for this Docket: 20