alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3438-3439]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1291]

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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Georgia Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Georgia 
Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held on 
Thursday, February 16, 2012, at the Conference Center, Sam Nunn Federal 
Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, GA 30303. The meeting is 
scheduled to begin at 10

[[Page 3439]]

a.m. and adjourn at approximately noon. The purpose of the meeting is 
for Committee members to discuss the Committee's report on school 
discipline.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the Southern Regional Office of the 
Commission by March 16, 2012. The address is Southern Regional Office, 
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 61 Forsyth Street, Suite 16T126, 
Atlanta, GA 30303. Persons wishing to email their comments, or to 
present their comments verbally at the meeting, or who desire 
additional information should contact Peter Minarik, Regional Director, 
Southern Regional Office, at (404) 562-7000, (or for hearing impaired 
TDD (800) 877-8339), or by email pminarik@usccr.gov. Hearing-impaired 
persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign 
language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten 
(10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced 
at the Southern Regional Office, as they become available, both before 
and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory 
committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, 
www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Southern Regional Office at the above 
email or street address. The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the 
provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated in Washington, DC, January 18, 2012.
Peter Minarik,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2012-1291 Filed 1-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
AO 450 (Rev. 11/11) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

u the plaintiff (name) recover from the

defendant (name) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes prejudgment

interest at the rate of %, plus post judgment interest at the rate of % per annum, along with costs.

u the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

.

u other:

.

This action was (check one):

u tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has

rendered a verdict.

u tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

u decided by Judge on a motion for

.

Date: CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

4/9/2019

 Southern District of Ohio

Tamala Masters

3:17-cv-354

Commissioner of Social Security

✔ REVERSING THE ALJ’S NON-DISABILITY FINDING AS UNSUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE;

REMANDING THIS CASE TO THE COMMISSIONER UNDER THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42 U.S.C. §

405(g) FOR AN IMMEDIATE AWARD OF BENEFITS; TERMINATING THIS CASE.

✔ Michael J. Newman
Control Option

Annual

Emission 

Rate

(lb/MMBTu)

Percent

Reduction

(%)

Annual

Emissions

(tons)

Emission 

Reduction

(tons)

Baseline 0.461 NA 2723 NA

DSI 0.231 50.0% 1362 1361

LSD 0.065 85.9% 384 2339

LSFO 0.060 87.0% 354 2369

Notes:

(1) Baseline emissions are from CAMD, 2008-2010.

Corette SO2 Emissions and Costs Summary
Case: 3:17-mj-00440-SLO Doc #: 5 Filed: 10/05/17 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 16
Case: 3:17-mj-00440-SLO Doc #: 5 Filed: 10/05/17 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 17
Exhibit 31.1
**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
I, Douglas J. Cahill, President and Chief Executive Officer of Doane Pet Care Company, herebycertify that:
1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Doane Pet Care Company; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or 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 annual report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisannual report; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 registrant and we have:
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;  b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annualreport based on such evaluation; and  c)  disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls overfinancial reporting.
Date: April 1, 2005                                                                /s/ DOUGLAS J. CAHILL   Douglas J. Cahill   President and Chief ExecutiveOfficerDoane Pet Care Company
Ohancellors Eueshdbe, Huiboit, and *Matsbws,*

*JUNE.*1788.

#### Todd and wife, executors of Darrell vs. Executors of Rivers.

CASE SEVII.

B. B. p. 168

Bonds appa. j^may’be shown, by e-b^en<merety countersecu*

Tina was a Ml filed by the complainants to set aside and cancel certain bonds and mortgages given fey their testator to colonel Fivers, the defendants’ testator. They purported to fee absolute, but It was Insisted for the com-pMnamts, that they were really given to counter secure colonel Elvers against certain debts, in which he was security for complainants’ testator. '

The defendants denied any knowledge of these bonds and mortgages being given as counter securities, and Insisted upon them as absolute debts due to Ms estate.

Ora full examination the court was satisfied, from clear and indisputable evidence, founded partly on concurrent facts, proved by witnesses, and partly ora colonel Rivers’s owe declarations, that part of these bonds and mortgages, though apparently absolute, were given by Mr. Barrel to colonel Rivers as counter security, and accordingly decreed, that on the bond to Mr. Burrows (which was given by Darrell for a house, and to which Rivers was security,) feeing discharged by Darrel’s executors, the bond and mortgage (from Darrel to Rivers) should fee delivered up and cancelled, arad satisfaction entered thereon.

But there being no sufficient proof that the other bonds arad mortgages from Barrel! to Rivers were counter sect?.» *156rities, the court refused to decree them to he given up, „ and left them to be paid by Darrell’s executors.

E. Rutledge for complainant, — C. C. Pinckney for defendant.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4214 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

45300 Portola Avenue in Palm Desert, California, as the ‘‘Roy Wilson 

Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 7, 2009 

Mrs. BONO MACK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 45300 Portola Avenue in Palm Desert, California, as the ‘‘Roy Wilson Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ROY WILSON POST OFFICE. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 45300 Portola Avenue in Palm 

6 Desert, California, shall be known and designated as the 

7 ‘‘Roy Wilson Post Office’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4214 IH

1 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

2 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Roy Wilson Post Of3 fice’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ARTEM KOSHKALDA, individually and 

as sole Shareholder and Transferee of ART, 

LLC, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

E. LYNN SCHOENMANN, 

Trustee.

No. 19-56187 

D.C. No. 2:18-cv-05087-FMOAGR 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Fernando M. Olguin, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 8, 2020**

Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

SEP 15 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 19-56187 

Artem Koshkalda appeals pro se from the district court’s orders denying his 

motions to set aside his voluntary dismissal of this action. We have jurisdiction 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s 

ruling on motions brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Valdivia 

v. Schwarzenegger, 599 F.3d 984, 988 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Koshkalda’s Rule 

60(b) motions to set aside the bankruptcy trustee’s voluntary dismissal of this 

action because Koshkalda presented no basis for such relief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

60(b); United States v. Alpine Land & Reservoir Co., 984 F.2d 1047, 1049 (9th 

Cir. 1993) (explaining that Rule 60(b)(6) relief has been used “sparingly” and 

requires “extraordinary circumstances”).

We do not consider Koshkalda’s contentions challenging rulings in his 

bankruptcy case because such a challenge is outside the scope of this appeal. 

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
Brenda Ross,

Plaintiff,

V.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

COLUMBUS DIVISION

Case No. 2:17-cv-718

Judge George C. Smith

Magistrate Judge Deavers

Credit One Bank, N.A.,

Defendant.

ORDER

Having considered thejoint stipulation by Brenda Ross ("FiaintifT') and CreditOne

Bank, N.A. ("Credit One") (Plaintiffand Credit One shall becollectively referred toas the

"Parties"), to submit this matter to binding arbitration before the American Arbitration

Association and to stay this matter, and with good cause shown, the Parties' jointstipulation is

hereby GRANTED. This matter isstayed pending theoutcome of thearbitration, and thisCourt

shall retain jurisdiction until the arbitration award is confirmed bythis Court.

Counsel for the Parties shall inform the Court ofthe conclusion ofthe arbitration and

move for confirmation ofthe arbitration award within a reasonable time after the arbitration

award is entered.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

HonorabI

Judge oftl Court
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

GREGORY S. SMALL,
Case No. 2:17-CV-737

Plaintiff,
JUDGE ALGENON L. MARBLEY
v.
3 Magistrate Judge Jolson
WALT HOLLEY, et ai., :
Defendants. :

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s October 2, 2017 Report
and Recommendation (ECF No. 5), which recommended that Plaintiff's motion for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis be denied (ECF No. 1) and that the action be dismissed for failure to
prosecute.

The Report and Recommendation specifically advised the parties that the failure to object
results in a waiver of the right to have the district judge review the Report and Recommendation
de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court
adopting the Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 5 at 2-3.) The parties have failed to file
any objections, and the deadline for objections (October 16, 2017) has lapsed.

The Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation based on the independent
consideration of the analysis therein. The case is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Algenon L. Marble’
ALGENON L. MARBLEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

DATED: December 12, 2017
Exhibit 31.2Cronos Global Income Fund XVIRule 13a-14 Certifications     I, John Kallas, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Cronos Global Income Fund XVI (the“Partnership”);     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Partnership as of, and for, the periods presented in this annualreport;     4. The other certifying officer of Cronos Capital Corp. (“CCC”), the General Partner of thePartnership, and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Partnership and wehave:          (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe Partnership, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;and          (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and          (c) disclosed in this report any change in the Partnership’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Partnership’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Partnership’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financialreporting.     5. CCC’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the Partnership’s auditors and the Audit Committeeof Partnership’s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):          (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect thePartnership’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and          (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.   Date: March 16, 2007     /s/ JOHN KALLAS   John Kallas  Chief Financial Officer of CCC
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 28218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11374]

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

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL

[Docket No. AS13-12]

Appraisal Subcommittee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions 
Examination Council.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

    Description: In accordance with Section 1104(b) of Title XI of the 
Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, 
as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal Subcommittee 
(ASC) will meet in closed session:
    Location: OCC--400 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20024.
    Date: May 21, 2013 (rescheduled from May 8th).
    Time: Immediately following the ASC open session.
    Status: Closed.

Matters To Be Considered

April 10, 2013 minutes--Closed Session
Preliminary discussion of State Compliance Reviews

    Dated: May 9, 2013.
James R. Park,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2013-11374 Filed 5-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```
EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
       (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 (b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over
financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
 (c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and
 (d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonable likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 (b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: September 15, 2009
    /s/ Ronald B. GeibRonald B. GeibChief Executive Officer
Case: 2:17-cv-00902-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 21 Filed: 04/23/18 Page: 1 of 5 PAGEID #: 260
Case: 2:17-cv-00902-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 21 Filed: 04/23/18 Page: 2 of 5 PAGEID #: 261
Case: 2:17-cv-00902-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 21 Filed: 04/23/18 Page: 3 of 5 PAGEID #: 262
Case: 2:17-cv-00902-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 21 Filed: 04/23/18 Page: 4 of 5 PAGEID #: 263
Case: 2:17-cv-00902-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 21 Filed: 04/23/18 Page: 5 of 5 PAGEID #: 264
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**


**RULE
      13a-14(b)/15d-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
      AND**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Eugene Science, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Byung
      Ho Hoang, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. 1350, 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 18, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                Byung Ho HoangByung
                Ho HoangChief
                Financial Officer(Principal
                Financial Officer)




This
      certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or
      15d-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A0959. WALTER THOMAS JARRELL v. THE STATE.

Counsel for Appellant in the above-styled case, pursuant to Court Rule 41 (g)

(2), has filed a Motion To Withdraw Appeal.

Court Rule 41 (g) (2) provides as follows:

In a criminal case, unless the State is the appellant, the motion shall

include an affidavitfromthe defendant agreeing to the withdrawal of the

appeal. Should the defendant refuse to provide an affidavit, counsel

shall advise the Court of that fact and state in the motion the grounds for

withdrawing the appeal.

Counsel states in the motion the defendant has been notified and asked to

execute an affidavit. As of the filing of the motion, the defendant has not responded.

Said Motion is hereby GRANTED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

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.

February 12, 2019

02/12/2019