alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EPA. REGION Ill

OPFICE OF REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR

July 21, 2010

Mr. Shawn M. GarvinUSEPA REGION 3

1650 Arch Street

Mail Code: 3RAOOPhiladelphia, PA 19103-2029

Dear Mr. Garvin,The Maryland Department ofthe Environment (MDE) is formally submitting the attached letter thataddresses the Clean Air Act Section 110 (a)(2) elements for the 2006 revisions to the PM2.5 NAAQS.The MDE is also providing documentation showing that a thirty day comment period was offered on theCAA 11 0(a)(2) letter and no comments were received.

If I may be of further assistance, please contact me or Mrs. Diane Franks, Program Manager, Air Quality

Planning Program at 410-537-3250 or by email at dfranks@mde.state.md.us.

Sincerely, RECEIVED

JUL 27 2010

George (Tad) Aburn Division Director (3APOO)

Director

Air and Radiation Management Administration

CC: Diane Franks, Program Manager, Air Quality Planning Program

Brian Hug, Deputy Program Manager, Air Quality Planning Program

Recycled Paper www.mde.state.md.us TTY Users 1-800-735-2258

Via Maryland Relay Service
#### C.L.H., In re Adoption of; A.M.S., In re

03/29/2016

88 WAL (2016)

Denied

Pa.Super., 136 A.3d 1038
# EUR-Lex - 32010M5809 - EN

*|*

# 32010M5809

**Commission Decision of 16/03/2010 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No COMP/M.5809 - MITSUBISHI / JGC / EBARA / EES) according to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (Only the English text is authentic) **

*
Official Journal 74 , 24/03/2010 P. 0008 - 0008 *

|EUROPEAN COMMISSION |

Brussels , 16.03.2010

SG-Greffe(2010) D/3214/3215/3216

C(2010)1866

PUBLIC VERSION

MERGER PROCEDURE ARTICLE 6(1)(b) DECISION

SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE

| |To the notifying parties |

Dear Madam(s) and/or Sir(s),

Subject: Case No COMP/M.5809 - MITSUBISHI/ JGC/ EBARA/ EES Notification of 17.02.2010 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [1] Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 46, 24.02.2010, p.12

1. On 17.02.2010, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the EC Merger Regulation by which the undertakings Mitsubishi Corporation (‘Mitsubishi’, Japan), JGC Corporation (‘JGC’, Japan) and Ebara Corporation (‘Ebara’, Japan) will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation joint control of the Ebara Engineering Service Co. Ltd (‘EES’, Japan) by way of sale and purchase of shares.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

- for Mitsubishi: a conglomerate active worldwide in many sectors including energy, metals, machinery, chemicals, food and general merchandise,

- for JGC: design, construction and operation of industrial plants and refineries,

- for Ebara: fluid transfer machinery (pumps, compressors, etc.), environmental facilities and related equipment (water waste, solid waste treatment etc.) and precision machinery for semiconductor industry,

- for EES: design, construction and operation of water treatment facilities and the provision of related services.

3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation and of paragraph 5(a) of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [2] .

4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation.

For the Commission (Signed) Alexander ITALIANER Director General

[1] OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the "EC Merger Regulation").

[2] OJ C 56, 05.3.2005, p. 32 ("Notice on a simplified procedure").
# L_2011185EN.01007901.xml

| 15.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 185/79 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 185/79

---

Corrigendum to Council Decision 2011/332/CFSP of 7 June 2011 amending Decision 2011/137/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 149 of 8 June 2011
  )

On page 10, Article 1, the text of the new paragraph 2a of Article 6 of Decision 2011/137/CFSP:

for:

‘ “2a   The prohibition on making funds, financial assets or economic resources available to persons or entities referred to in paragraph 1(b), in so far as it applies to port authorities, shall not prevent the execution, until 15 July 2011, of contracts concluded before the date of entry into force of this Decision, with the exception of contracts relating to oil, gas and refined products.’ ”,

read:

read:

‘ “2a   The prohibition on making funds, financial assets or economic resources available to persons or entities referred to in paragraph 1(b), in so far as it applies to port authorities, shall not prevent the execution, until 15 July 2011, of contracts concluded before 7 June 2011, with the exception of contracts relating to oil, gas and refined products.” ’.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000068619
<NAME> MOUNTAIN STATES RESOURCES CORPORATION
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           75,184
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,696,553
<OTHER-SE>                                 (5,771,737)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 60,221
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    60,221
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
        

</TABLE>
#### Keyspan Gas East Corporation, Respondent, v Munich Reinsurance America et al., Defendants, and Century Indemnity Company, Appellant.

[51 NYS3d 392]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered March 16, 2016, which denied defendant Century Indemnity Company’s motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The jury’s conclusions that plaintiff’s notice of occurrence to defendant was timely, that the property damage began in 1905, and that insurance was only available in the market between 1933 and 1986, are supported by sufficient evidence and are not against the weight of the evidence *(see Cohen v Hallmark Cards,*45 NY2d 493, 498-499 [1978]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur—Acosta, J.R, Mazzarelli, Manzanet-Daniels and Webber, JJ.
#### Com. v. Stultz

09/30/2015

428 MAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 114 A.3d 865
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 244 (Tuesday, December 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 78906]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32685]

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

Sunshine Act Meetings

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m., Friday, January 13, 2012.

PLACE: 1155 21st St. NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED 
    Surveillance and Enforcement Matters. In the event that the times 
or dates of these or any future meetings change, an announcement of the 
change, along with the new time and place of the meeting will be posted 
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.cftc.gov.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sauntia S. Warfield, (202) 418-
5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011-32685 Filed 12-16-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
# HQC employees compete in Black History Month challenge

/ Published Feb. 28, 2019
Fort Belvoir, Virginia, 
McNamara Headquarters Complex employees celebrated Black History Month in a unique way Feb. 27. Teams comprising representatives from the Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Contract Audit Agency and the Defense Technical Information Center tested their knowledge of black history by competing in an interactive, quiz-style competition following the style of a popular television gameshow. 

The observance was initially scheduled for Feb. 22, when DLA Director Army Lt. Gen. Darrell Williams was unable to attend, so he pre-recorded an address to the audience. Williams allowed the recording to play and then bounded up to the lectern to continue his remarks in person. 

The director emphasized that African-American culture touches every facet of American life by noting African-Americans’ contributions to art, music, sports, science, politics, religion, fashion and cuisine. Williams also recognized the service and sacrifice of all races and acknowledged that black history is American history.

DLA Deputy Chief of Staff Hellion Flowers served as gameshow host. He joked he was a mix of Steve Harvey and Ellen DeGeneres, but would attempt to be more like Alex Trebek while officiating. After introducing judges, participants, timekeepers and scorekeepers, he laid out the rules of the game, adding that answers had to be complete, stated in the form of a question and voiced by the team captain.

Teams chose questions from six categories: people and culture, movements, laws, politicians, military and education. More difficult questions earned team members higher point values if answered correctly. 

Competition among teams proved intense. More than once, Flowers asked judges to rule on the accuracy of answers or to verify which team buzzed in first. Members of the DCAA team correctly answered this 200-point military question: “Shortly after his arrival to a [Department of Defense] agency, this individual instituted a people and culture plan under the agency’s Strategic Plan ...” but ultimately, they placed third in the competition. 

The final scores between DLA and DTIC were close, but DLA secured first place and won bragging rights for their expert knowledge of black-history-related facts. 

The next special emphasis observance will be a Women’s History Month event in the Kabeiseman Center March 20.
No. 12-7883.

#### Gilliland *v.*Kansas.

Sup. Ct. Kan. Certio-rari denied.
CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








To
      the
      Board of Directors


Energy
      Infrastructure Acquisition Corp.








We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation of our report dated March 28, 2007 included in
      this
      form 10K, on the financial statements of Energy Infrastructure Acquisition
      Corp.
      (a corporation in the development stage) as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 and
      for year ended December 31, 2006 and for the periods from August 11, 2005
      (inception) to December 31, 2005 and August 11, 2005 (inception) to December
      31,
      2006 (cumulative).








/s/
      GOLDSTEIN GOLUB KESSLER LLP  GOLDSTEIN
      GOLUB KESSLER LLP


New
      York,
      New York





March
      28,
      2007
No. 12-812.

#### Anaya-Aguilar *v.*Holder, Attorney General.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Kagan took *1206no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
San Joaquin honors Class of 2020 amid pandemic
 
  By  Annette Silva, DLA Distribution San Joaquin Public Affairs
  The Civilian Welfare Fund Council at Defense Logistics Agency Distribution San Joaquin, California, is constantly finding ways to give back to the workforce and build morale. Weekly, the team meets to discuss ideas for fundraising opportunities and discuss ways of giving back to the employees. “One of the members thought due to the COVID-19 pandemic and graduations coming to a halt, the CWF team would oversee a kind gesture and make their day a little special to show them that we care,” said CWF chair Kristen Roberts. The plan set into action was to solicit volunteers from the workforce to adopt an eighth grade or high school graduate of a DDJC employee. The employee who adopted the graduate put together a graduation basket, during non-duty hours, for the person they sponsored. As a result, 16 students received a basket. There was a wide variety of baskets to present. Graduates received gift cards, candles, blankets, their favorite snacks, drinks and all sorts of goodies. “The feedback we received was positive. The graduates and their parents loved the idea and they were all very appreciative and it was a great way to give back to our employees,” concluded Roberts.
No. 12-8407.

#### Mason *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
     I, Leonard R. Stein-Sapir, Chairman of the Board and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of Morgan’s Foods, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify, pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the periodended August 15, 2004, (the “Report”), which this certificationaccompanies, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operationsof the Company.
Dated: September 29, 2004              /s/ Leonard R. Stein-Sapir   Leonard R. Stein-Sapir, Chairman of the Board and   Chief Executive Officer  
18
# Distribution’s Sims presented with commander’s coin

/ Published Feb. 27, 2019
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
DLA Distribution Organizational Management’s, Bradford Sims was selected by leadership to receive a commander’s coin during DLA Distribution commanding officer Navy Rear Adm. Kevin M. Jones’ employee recognition event Feb. 1.

During a recent inspection, Sims was recognized by the Department of State for his management of the DLA Distribution passport office.Not only was his program found to be fully compliant with all current passport requirements, but he was specifically recognized for attentiveness to procedures, his information security and his pre-appearance instructions. 

Additionally, while he is not required to process Visas, he was recognized for his support as his work assists other State Department offices.
2017-0595.

#### State v. Churchill.

Franklin App. Nos. 16AP-460, 16AP-461, and 16AP-462. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

Fischer and DeWine, JJ., dissent.
#### In the Matter of Steven J. Eichberg, Respondent, v Franklin Maisano, Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 795]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 6212 (e) and 6221 to recover damages for wrongful attachment, Franklin Maisano appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Segal, J.), entered August 30, 2002, as granted the petition to the extent of determining that Franklin Maisano was liable for the damages sustained by the petitioner due to the wrongful attachment of the petitioner’s property and referred the matter for a hearing to report on the amount of the petitioner’s damages pursuant to CPLR 6212 (e).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The appellant contends that he is not liable for any damages sustained by the petitioner due to the wrongful attachment of the petitioner’s property because the levy upon the petitioner’s brokerage account was the result of the petitioner’s culpable conduct in opening the account with another person’s Social Security number. However, an attaching party is strictly liable for all damages resulting from a wrongful attachment, without regard to fault *(see*CPLR 6212 [e]; McLaughlin, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C6212:8). CPLR 6212 (e) recognizes that “attachment is a drastic provisional remedy to be used with care” *(Ford Motor Credit Co. v Hickey Ford Sales,*62 NY2d 291, 303 [1984], quoting 22nd Ann Report of Jud Conf on CPLR, at 256).

The legal expenses incurred by the petitioner to vacate the order of attachment granted in the course of an action to re*445cover damages for fraud commenced by the appellant *(see Maisano v Beckoff,*270 AD2d 399 [2000]) constitute “damages . . . sustained by reason of the attachment” within the intent and meaning of CPLR 6212 (e) *(see Thropp v Erb,*255 NY 75, 81 [1930]; *cf. Marcella’s Appliances Sales & Servs. v General Elec. Credit Corp.,*76 AD2d 990 [1980]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly determined that the appellant was liable for the petitioner’s damages.

The appellant’s argument with respect to certain of the Supreme Court’s factual findings does not require reversal. S. Miller, J.P., Friedmann, Townes and Mastro, JJ., concur.
# L_2011094EN.01002801.xml

| 8.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 94/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 94/28

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 31 March 2011

establishing the position to be taken by the European Union within the International Grains Council with respect to the extension of the Grains Trade Convention 1995

(2011/224/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 207 in conjunction with Article 218(9) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Whereas the Grains Trade Convention 1995, which was concluded on behalf of the Community by the Council through Decision 96/88/EC (1), was regularly extended for successive periods of 2 years. This Convention was last extended by a decision of the International Grains Council of 8 June 2009 and it shall remain in force until 30 June 2011. A further extension is in the interest of the Union. The Commission, which represents the Union within the International Grains Council, should therefore be authorised to vote in favour of such extension,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The position to be taken by the Union within the International Grains Council shall be to vote in favour of the extension of the Grains Trade Convention 1995 for a further period of up to 2 years.

The Commission is hereby authorised to express this position within the International Grains Council.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 31 March 2011.

For the Council

The President

VÖLNER P.

---

(1)  
  OJ L 21, 27.1.1996, p. 47.

1

---
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION



I, Glenn M. Dobbs, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Mines Management, Inc. (the registrant);

2.

Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 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) and 15d-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 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; and

(c)

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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(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; 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:  May 13, 2005

/s/ Glenn M. Dobbs



Glenn M. Dobbs

Chief Executive Officer





1