alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711

Mr. Brandon Morrison England's Stove Works, Inc 589 South Five Forks Road Monroe, VA 24574 DearMr. Morrison, 

## SEP 02ZDJ4

OFFICE OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS

I am writing in response to a letter dated July 30, 2014, from your consultantMark Champion (Heaerthlab Solutions, LLC) requesting the use ofthe new proposed test method for pelletheaters ASTM E2779-10 Standard Test Method for Determining Pmticulate Matter Emissions from PelletHeaters as an altemative to EPA Method 28 (40 CFR 60, Appendix A-8) as required under 40 CFR 60 SubpartAAA Standards of Performance for NewResidential Wood Heaters. This altemative request is to be used for certification testing oftwo new pellet stove models developed by England's Stove Works, Inc located at 589 South Five Forks Road, Monroe, VA 24574. Inthe letter from Mark Champion, it mentions that you are aware thatyour request is being made after proposal and priorto promulgation ofany amendments to SubpartAAA and thatthere is no guarantee that ASTM E2779-10 will be included in the final regulation. You also mention that under the current Subpart AAA, EPA has the authority to allow altemative test methods andthat you are not aware ofany negative concems regarding the use ofASTM E2770-10. Based on the information provided, we agree that using ASTM E2779-10 test method would be an acceptable and are therefore approving the use ofASTM E2779-10 as an altemative to EPA Method 28 with the following limitation ASTM E2779-10 includes the use ofASTM E2515-11 Standard Test Method for Determination ofParticulate Matter Emissions Collected by a Dilution Tunnel for the particulate matter measurement, but does not include an adjustment ofthe particulate matter emissions. Underthe current SubpartAAA, the particulate matter emissions results for wood stoves and pellet heaters must be adjusted using Equation 5G-4 in Method 5G (40 CFR 60, Appendix A-3). When using ASTM E2779-l0, you must adjust the particulate matter emissions results according to Equation 5G-4 of Method 5G and include the adjusted results as well as this approval in your certification testreport. Ifyou have additional questions, please contact Michael Toney ofmy staffat (919) 541-5247.
Sincerely,

**~~------** ewees, Acting Group Leader rement Technology Group

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov Recycled/Recyclable • Printed

**w~h** Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postconsumer)

### 2

Attachments

cc: Gil Wood, EPA/OlD (C304-03) David Cole, EPA/OlD (C304-03) Michael Toney, EPA/AQAD (El43-02) Rafael Sanchez, EPA/MAMPD (MS-2227A) Mark Champion P.O. Box451 Bethel, VT 05032
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 11698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04316]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Docket ID: DoD-2022-OS-0023]


Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Correction

AGENCY: The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and 
Readiness (USD(P&R)), Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: 60-Day information collection notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is correcting a notice that appeared 
in the Federal Register on February 23, 2022. Subsequent to publication 
of the notice, the DoD discovered that the Docket ID was not listed 
correctly. DoD is issuing this correction to provide the correct Docket 
ID.

DATES: This correction is effective on March 2, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Toppings, 571-372-0485.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2022-03782 appearing at 87 FR 
10179-10180 in the Federal Register of Wednesday, February 23, 2022, 
the Docket ID is changed to read [Docket ID: DoD-2022-OS-0023] as set 
forth above.

    Dated: February 23, 2022.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2022-04316 Filed 3-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 2000 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 OF AUDIOVISUAL
SERVICES CORPORATION AS SET FOURTH IN THIS FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINACIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           3,014
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   61,077
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,628
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                81,110
<PP&E>                                         146,172
<DEPRECIATION>                                  76,796
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 435,790
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           41,288
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           239
<OTHER-SE>                                      38,005
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   435,790
<SALES>                                        327,028
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               327,028
<CGS>                                          264,175
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  264,175
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                48,228
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,686
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (25,661)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (25,661)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (16,128)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (40,313)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (82,102)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.46)



</TABLE>
|  | (a) | The      annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 of the      Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(b) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|--|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | (b) | Information      contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of the    Company. |
|--|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ Gary      Guseinov       |
|------------------------------|
| Gary      Guseinov           |
| Chief      Executive Officer |
|                         |
| /s/ Kevin Harris             |
| Kevin Harris                 |
| Chief      Financial Officer |

----
#### Tamina Christine SHOCK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT; T. Bachman, Pin #5796, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-16446

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 26, 2017*

Filed July 5, 2017

*586Tamina Christine Shock, Pro Se

Robert A. Rabbat, Esquire, Enenstein Pham *&*Glass, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument; *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Tamina Christine Shock appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in her 42 U.S.C, § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations related to a search of her residence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Cameron v. Craig,*713 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2013), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Shock failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the search warrant was not supported by probable cause or whether defendants were liable for the execution of the warrant. *See id.*(setting forth probable cause standard under the Fourth Amendment); *Boyd v. Benton County,*374 F.3d 773, 780 (9th Cir. 2004) (explaining that “integral participation” is required for liability under § 1983); *Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs.,*436 U.S. 658, 690, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978) (setting forth requirements for municipal liability).

The district court properly dismissed Shock’s Fifth Amendment claim because Shock did not allege facts sufficient to state a cognizable, claim. *See Bingue v. Prunchak,*512 F.3d 1169, 1174 (9th Cir. 2008) (setting forth standard of review and stating that the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause only applies to the federal government); *see also Schneider v. Cal. Dep’t of Con.,*151 F.3d 1194, 1198 (9th Cir. 1998) (setting forth requirements for stating a claim under the Takings Clause),

The district court did not abuse its discretion by granting attorney’s fees to defendants. *See Transamerica Corp. v. Transamerica Bancgrowth Corp.,*627 F.2d 963, 965-66 (9th Cir. 1980) (setting forth standard of review and stating that sanctions may be imposed for a party’s failure to appear).

We reject as meritless Shock’s contentions that the district court lacked jurisdiction, including Shock’s contentions regarding her filings for quo warranto and writ of mandamus.

We reject as meritless Shock’s contentions of judicial misconduct or bias.

We reject as unsupported by the record Shock’s contention that Detective Gillespie was properly served.

We do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED,

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. BLISS & LAUGHLIN, INCORPORATED, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 753-60.

United States District Court S. D. California, Central Division.

Jan. 29, 1962.

Maxwell M. Blecher, Malcolm D. MacArthur, Antitrust Division, Dept. of Justice, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff.

Stephens, Jones, LaFever & Smith, by Maurice Jones, Jr., Los Angeles, Cal., and Dallstream, Schiff, Hardin, Waite & Dorschel, by W. Donald McSweeney, James R. Mitchell, Chicago, Ill., for defendant.

THURMOND CLARKE, District Judge.

This is a civil antitrust action brought by the United States against Bliss & Laughlin, .Incorporated, of Harvey, Illinois, defendant, for alleged violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C.A. § 18). Plaintiff alleges that the defendant’s purchase of the assets of Sierra Drawn Steel Corporation in February, 1960, then located at Los Angeles, California, may tend to substantially lessen competition in the production and sale of cold finished steel bars in the four-state area of California, Oregon, Washington and Arizona.

The plaintiff has failed to prove that the challenged acquisition has the reasonable probability of substantially lessening competition in the production or sale of cold- finished steel bars in these four western states. This case is distinguishable on the significant facts from Crown Zellerbach Corp. v. Federal Trade Commission, 9 Cir., 296 F.2d 800, upon which the plaintiff places much reliance. The defendant and most of the other com*335panies selling cold finished steel bars in this area, collectively ship substantial tonnage into the four-state area from various producing locations in the Midwest and the East. Cf. Tampa Electric Co. v. Nashville Coal Co., 365 U.S. 320, 81 S.Ct. 623, 5 L.Ed.2d 580 (1961). Prior to the acquisition, the defendant owned no mills located in the four-state area and the overwhelming preponderance of its sales were made elsewhere.

The record in this case shows an abundance of capacity and of competing sellers, a wide choice of suppliers among which the purchasers may choose, a lack of obstacles restraining new entrants into the business, and a lack of power in the defendant to control prices, supply or entry. All of these factors tend to insure vigorous competition.

The plaintiff’s motion for a temporary injunction will be denied and the defendant will submit findings of fact and conclusions of law consistent with this memorandum within 30 days.

It is ordered that the Clerk shall this day serve copies of this Memorandum Opinion by United States mail upon the attorneys for the parties appearing in this cause.
Exhibit 32.2

Written Statement of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority (the Authority), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge,
on the date hereof:



| | (a) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Authority for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/    LEO M.
CHUPASKALeo M. ChupaskaChief Financial Officer,Mohegan Tribal Gaming AuthorityMay 15, 2008


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
to the Authority and will be retained by the Authority and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Brown, Wheelock, Harris, Stevens, Inc., Respondent, *v.*Coty, Inc., Appellant.

Argued May 27, 1943;

decided July 20, 1943.

*604
      *Mahlofi B. Doing*and *Alexis C. Coudert*for appellant.

*Alexander Pfeiffer*and *Myron P. Gordon*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacher, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.2


                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT


I, Sangeon Park,  Chief  Financial  Officer of MB Tech,  Inc. ( the  "Company"),
certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

-    The Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended  December 31, 2004 fully complies
     with  the  requirements  of  Section  13 (a)  or 15  (d) of the  Securities
     Exchange Act of 1934 ( 15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d); and

-    The information  contained in the quarterly report fairly presents,  in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Company.


Dated: April 15, 2005


/s/ Sangeon Park
--------------------------
Sangeon Park
Chief Financial Officer
|   | (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 Fund. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: | August 23, 2010 |   |   | RIDGEWOOD ENERGY U FUND, LLC               |
|--------|-----------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|   |            | By:    | /s/    | ROBERT E. SWANSON                                    |
|   |            |   | Name:  | Robert E. Swanson                                    |
|   |            |   | Title: | Chief Executive Officer                              |
|   |            |   |   | (Principal Executive Officer)                        |
|   |            |   |   |                                                 |
| Dated: | August 23, 2010 |   |   |                                                 |
|   |            | By:    | /s/    | KATHLEEN P. MCSHERRY                                 |
|   |            |   | Name:  | Kathleen P. McSherry                                 |
|   |            |   | Title: | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|   |            |   |   | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)         |
|   |            |   |   |                                                 |
|   |            |   |   |                                                 |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6826 Received in Senate (RDS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6826

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 4, 2024

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the visitor and education center at Fort McHenry National 
   Monument and Historic Shrine as the Paul S. Sarbanes Visitor and 
                           Education Center.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    (a) Designation.--The visitor and education center at Fort McHenry 
National Monument and Historic Shrine, currently located at 2400 E Fort 
Ave, Baltimore, MD 21230, is designated as the ``Paul S. Sarbanes 
Visitor and Education Center''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other document of the United States to the visitor center 
designated by subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
Paul S. Sarbanes Visitor and Education Center.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 3, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### Abraham Sacks, Respondent, *v.*Louis E. Philips, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Argued June 17, 1943;

decided July 20, 1943.

*632
      *Julius S. Christensen, James J. McLoughlin*and *Thomas F. Harrigan*for appellant.

*Arthur 8. Gales*and *Joseph 8. Robinson*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacher, JJ.
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 Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-953]
 AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.
 ACTION: Notice of application.
 SUMMARY: Benuvia Therapeutics Inc., has applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). Refer to Supplemental Information listed below for further drug information.
 DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before April 25, 2022. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before April 25, 2022.
 ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on November 16, 2021, Benuvia Therapeutics Inc., 2700 Oakmont Drive, Round Rock, Texas 78665, applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s): Controlled substance
Drug code
ScheduleTetrahydrocannabinols
7370
I3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine
7400
I3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine
7405
I5-Methoxy-N-N-dimethyltryptamine
7431
IDimethyltryptamine
7435
IPsilocybin
7437
IPsilocyn
7438
I5-Methoxy-N,N-diisopropyltryptamine
7439
I
 
 
 The company plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substances for the internal use intermediates or for sale to its customers. The company plans to manufacture the above-listed controlled substances in bulk to produce finished dosage forms and conduct research to develop new drug products and for clinical studies. In reference to drug code 7370 (Tetrahydrocannabinols), the company plans to bulk manufacture this drug as a synthetic. No other activities for these drug codes are authorized for this registration. Matthew J. Strait, Deputy Assistant Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2022-03897 Filed 2-23-22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
#### Seymour T. Day, Respondent, *v.*Rhoda N. Monteath, Administrator, etc., Appellant.

(Argued September 19, 1871;

decided January term, 1872.)

Decided upon the facts in the case.

*George B. Hibbard*for the appellant.

*John Ganson*for the respondent.

Lott, Ch. C., and Leonard, C., read for affirmance.

All concur. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-8009

CHAUNCEY DEMETRIUS BENNETT,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

KATHLEEN GREEN, Warden; DOUGLAS MATTHEWS, Captain; 

STEPHEN T. MOYER, Secretary; RICHARD GRAHAM, JR., Warden -

W.C.I.; WAYNE WEBB, Commissioner; LARRY HOGAN, Governor,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. 

(1:15-cv-03748-JKB)

Submitted: April 19, 2016 Decided: April 29, 2016

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chauncey Demetrius Bennett, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Chauncey Demetrius Bennett appeals the district court’s 

order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2012) for failure to state a claim. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Bennett v. Green, No. 1:15-cv-03748-JKB (D. Md. Dec. 15, 

2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED