alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                  
|View History: Annual                                            
|View History: Annual                                            
|View History:                                                   
|                                                                
|Kansas Natural Gas % of Total Vehicle Fuel Deliveries  (Percent)
|                                                                
|                                                                
|Kansas Natural Gas % of Total Vehicle Fuel Deliveries  (Percent)
|                                                                

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        | 0.57   | 0.09   | 0.06   | 0.07   | 0.05   | 0.05  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0.05   | 0.05   | 0.04   | 0.05   | 0.05   | 0.06   | 0.05   | 0.05   | 0.04   | 0.03  
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0.03   | 0.02   | 0.02   | 0.04   | 0.04   | 0.26   | 0.44   | 1.00   | 1.36   | 1.37  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 1.57   | 1.69   | 2.01   |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
EX-34 (d)
(logo) KPMG

KPMG LLP
1601 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2499


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Members
Regulus Group LLC:

We have examined management's assessment for those customers that management has
informed us have requested confirmation of compliance, included in the
accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing
Criteria, that Regulus Group LLC complied with the servicing criteria set
forth in Item 1122(d)(2)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(iv) of the Securities and Exchange
Commission's Regulation AB for remittance processing services to those issuers
of asset backed securities and servicers of loan and/or receivables portfolios
that include pool assets for asset backed securities transactions (the Platform)
as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006. Regulus Group LLC has determined
that the remainder of the servicing criteria are not applicable to the
activities it performs with respect to the Platform as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2006. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with
those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
management's assessment about the Company's compliance based on our
examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
servicing criteria specified above and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of
less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that
comprise the Platform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities
related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those
selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with
the servicing criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected
transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period
covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether
errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may
have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company
during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any
other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the
Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assessment that the Company complied with the
aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006
is fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ KPMG LLP


Philadelphia, PA
February 22, 2007


KPMG LLP, a U.S. limited liability partnership, is the U.S.
member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative.
|                                                                                          
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History:                                                                             
|                                                                                          
|New Mexico Natural Gas Number of Residential Consumers - Transported  (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                          
|                                                                                          
|New Mexico Natural Gas Number of Residential Consumers - Transported  (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 2      | 149    | 6     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 1      | 1      | 2      | 2      | 1      | 12     |        |        |       
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 27     | 45     | 61     | 78     | 82     | 78     | 81     | 89     | 109    | 106   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 102    | 108    | 106    |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
1 of 2

Teleconference of EPA Region 4 Regional Tribal Operations Committee

Discussion of Potential Reinterpretation of Clean Water Act TAS Provisions

May 7, 2014, 11:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. EDT

Teleconference Summary 

Moderator: Eve Zimmerman, EPA Region 4

Presenter: Fred Leutner, EPA Office of Science and Technology

Participants: See last page – about 16 tribal representatives attended

The teleconference began with introductions followed by a presentation by Mr. Leutner based on 

briefing slides available on EPA’s website 

http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/wqslibrary/tribal.cfm.

The teleconference continued with an opportunity for questions and comments from RTOC 

participants. The following is a list of questions and comments received from tribal participants during 

the webinar. For each of the questions, the EPA presenters provided responses that were consistent with 

the presentation materials and other information available at 

http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/wqslibrary/tribal.cfm. Tribal views and 

comments provided were acknowledged, and will be considered by EPA in developing the 

proposed rule. 

 One participant stated that the tribes do not consider EPA’s webinars to be adequate 

consultation. 

 Should tribes with 303 (c) TAS authority redo their applications?

 Will states receive consultation on this reinterpretation?

 Is the amount of fee lands important?

 Will the reinterpretation affect OK and AK?
2 of 2

List of Attendees:

Tribal Staff: 

Jamie Long, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians 

William Turner, Mississippi Band of Choctaw 

David Warfel, Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida 

Edith Eshkibok, Seminole Tribe of Florida

Gintautas Zavadzkas, Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida

James Erskine, Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida 

Jerry Cain, Mississippi Band of Choctaw

Jerry Pardilla, USET 

Katie Tiger, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians 

Kevin Donaldson, Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida

Michael Bolt, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians

Ralph McCullers, Poarch Band of Creek Indians

Scottie Wallace, Mississippi Band of Choctaw 

Stacy Myers, Seminole Tribe

Steve Terry, USET 

Tiffany Janes, Poarch Band of Creek Indians

EPA Region 4 Staff: 

Nelson, Rosemarie

Dilts, Adam 

Winter, Betty 

Smith, Brian 

Nolan, Cindy 

Edwards, Cynthia

Simonson, Davy

Zimmerman, Eve

Shadle, Jennifer

Long, Larry

Miller, Mallory 

Smith, Miya 

Livingston, Pat 

Pierce, Troy

Rao, Seema 

Brown, Sharon

Shepherd, Lorinda

Wilson, Shevella

Thomas-Burton, Tami 

Baugh, Thomas L
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Morton Industrial Group, Inc.;
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light
of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this quarterly report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented
in this quarterly report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e))
for the registrant and have:
 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 quarterly report
is being prepared;b)
    
    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;
andc)
    
    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
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors:
 a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    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.
#### COM. v. TILLMAN, R.

2548 EDA 2015

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

08/21/2017

CP-51-CR-0013603-2013

(Philadelphia)

Affirmed — Application to Withdraw as Counsel Granted
|                                                                  
|------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                  
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)          
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                    
|View History:                                                     
|                                                                  
|South Dakota Natural Gas Marketed Production  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                  
|                                                                  
|South Dakota Natural Gas Marketed Production  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                  

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1970's                                                                                                                            | 0      |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 0      |        | 914   
|1980's                                                                                                                            | 1,193  | 1,155  | 2,331  | 1,846  | 1,947  | 2,558  | 2,231  | 3,431  | 3,920  | 4,369 
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 881    | 882    | 1,456  | 1,306  | 1,437  | 1,252  | 1,329  | 1,598  | 1,620  | 1,566 
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 1,652  | 1,100  | 1,025  | 1,103  | 1,093  | 992    | 963    | 995    | 1,644  | 2,129 
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1,862  | 1,848  | 15,085 | 16,205 | 15,305 | 553    | 455    | 476    | 447    | 414   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 160    | 161    | 165    |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 3/29/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 4/30/2024
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1208 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1208

 To amend the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to permit a 
prevailing party in an action or proceeding brought to enforce the Act 
     to be awarded expert witness fees and certain other expenses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 17, 2011

Mr. Van Hollen (for himself and Mr. Sessions) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 
                               Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to permit a 
prevailing party in an action or proceeding brought to enforce the Act 
     to be awarded expert witness fees and certain other expenses.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``IDEA Fairness Restoration Act''.

SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF EXPERT WITNESS FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES AS 
              ATTORNEYS' FEES.

    (a) In General.--Section 615(i)(3) of the Individuals with 
Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1415(i)(3)) is amended by adding 
at the end the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(H) Inclusion of expert witness fees and other 
                expenses as attorneys' fees.--For the purposes of this 
                paragraph, the term `attorneys' fees' shall include the 
                fees of expert witnesses, including the reasonable 
                costs of any test or evaluation necessary for the 
                preparation of the parent or guardian's case in the 
                action or proceeding.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to any action or proceeding brought under section 615 of the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1415) that has 
not been finally adjudicated as of the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

JAIME MORENO, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-30095 

D.C. No. 1:99-cr-00048-SPW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 13, 2018**

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Jaime Moreno appeals pro se from the district court's denial of his 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 

U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 

672 (9th Cir. 2009), we affirm.

 

* 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

FEB 16 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-30095 

In the district court, Moreno moved for a sentence reduction in light of 

Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). The district court correctly 

concluded that this claim does not provide a basis for relief under section 

3582(c)(2). See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 824-26 (2010) (section 

3582(c)(2) does not authorize a resentencing proceeding, but rather authorizes the 

district court to modify a sentence in the “limited circumstance[]” where a 

defendant who was sentenced based on a sentencing range that was subsequently 

lowered). 

On appeal, Moreno raises several new arguments, including claims 

challenging his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), the effectiveness of his trial 

counsel, and the length of his sentence. These claims are not properly before us,

see United States v. Antonakeas, 255 F.3d 714, 721 (9th Cir. 2001), and are outside 

the scope of a section 3582(c)(2) motion, see Dillon, 560 U.S. at 831.

To the extent Moreno seeks to recall the mandate in one of his previous 

appeals, that request may not be raised in this appeal.

AFFIRMED.
#### Darryl FISHER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-2876

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[September 28, 2017]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Robert E. Belanger, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562016CF000126A.

Affirmed.