alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32976-32977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13096]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-856]


Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Purisys, 
LLC.

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.

ACTION: Notice of application.

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

SUMMARY: Purisys, LLC. 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 August 23, 2021. 
Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the 
application on or before August 23, 2021.

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 March, 12, 2021, Purisys, LLC., 1550 Olympic Drive, 
Athens, Georgia 30601-1602, applied to be registered as a bulk 
manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled 
substance(s):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Drug
          Controlled substance             code          Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine...........    7400  I
3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine.......    7404  I
3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine...    7405  I
Psilocybin..............................    7437  I
Psilocyn................................    7438  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 as clinical trial and starting materials to make compounds 
for distribution to its customers. No other

[[Page 32977]]

activity for these drug codes is authorized for this registration.

William T. McDermott,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-13096 Filed 6-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

KENNETH MARCUM, )

)

Plaintiff, ) 1:13-CV-158

)

GRAPHIC PACKAGING INTERNATIONAL, )

INC., and CIGNA LEAVE SOLUTIONS, )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the issue of whether Attorney Bolinger or his client,

Kenneth W. Marcum, should be sanctioned for their failure to attend the hearing on August 28,

2013. The Court held a show cause hearing on September 20, 2013, in which Attorney Bolinger

and Marcum were present. Attorney Bolinger has since supplemented his response on

September 20, 2013, with an affidavit (Docket #29.) 

Given that Attorney Bolinger and Marcum are jointly responsible for the fees and

expenses the Court awarded following the granting of the Defendants’ Motion to Compel, the

Court finds that no sanctions payable to the Clerk should be imposed.

SO ORDERED. 

Enter for this 25th day of September, 2013. 

/S/ Roger B. Cosbey

Roger B. Cosbey,

United States Magistrate Judge
#### James Earl SWITZER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Henry McMaster, Attorney General for South Carolina, Respondents—Appellees.

No. 04-6185.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 19, 2004.

Decided May 25, 2004.

James Earl Switzer, Appellant pro se.

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

James Earl Switzer, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the district court’s resolution of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 337-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Switzer has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
#### BRIGGS v. HUSING.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

April 16, 1912.)

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Fifth District. Action by John H. Briggs, doing business as the Standard Coat & Apron Supply Company, against August Husing. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Modified, and s.ffirmed conditionally. Morris Kamber, of New York City, for appellant. Kendrick & Kendrick, of New York City, for respondent.

BIJUR, J.

This action was brought *to*recover for the use of coats and aprons furnished by plaintiff to defendant’s barkeepers. Judgment was rendered for the full amount demanded in the bill of particulars. On conflicting evidence, the court evidently believed the plaintiff’s version; but, on cross-examination, the plaintiff himself testified that defendant ordered him to deliver six coats and twelve aprons. Whether this means weekly, or at each delivery, is not clear. He also testified that defendant had ordered him to deliver as much as was needed. Measured by the limitation which plaintiff himself concedes was placed upon the order, and even adding thereto the possible extension of three additional coats, which defendant admitted to have ordered to be delivered weekly, apparently at plaintiff’s discretion, the judgment is excessive. Under the circumstances, we must adopt the suggestion of the appellant that, if the plaintiff will acquiesce in a reduction of the judgment to the sum of $133.40 and appropriate costs in the court below, the judgment, as thus modified, will be affirmed, without costs to either party upon this appeal; otherwise, the judgment must be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.
Exhibit 32.1

** **

** **

**Certification of CEO andCFO**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350,**

**AsAdopted Pursuant to**

Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

 

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Shelter Properties V Limited Partnership (the"Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), StevenD. Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership,and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of thePartnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to thebest of his knowledge:

 

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 

Thiscertification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

3501 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22226-3500 Office of Minority and Women Inclusion

March 25, 2019

To: Presidents/Chief Executive Officers of FDIC Regulated Financial Institutions 

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) Financial Institution Diversity Program is 

responsible for assessing the diversity policies and practices of FDIC-regulated financial 

institutions. On January 17, 2019, the FDIC sent letters encouraging the financial institutions we 

regulate to submit their 2018 diversity self-assessments. I am contacting you now as a reminder to 

participate in this important program by conducting a self-assessment of your diversity policies 

and practices, as outlined in the Interagency Policy Statement Establishing Joint Standards for 

Assessing the Diversity Policies and Practices of Entities Regulated by the Agencies (Policy 

Statement).

The FDIC is pleased by the participation thus far, and I extend my appreciation for your time and 

commitment in voluntarily assessing and submitting information about your diversity and 

inclusion practices. Be assured that the FDIC treats all information you provide as confidential 

commercial information, as appropriate.

An analysis of the assessment information reported for 2016 and 2017 demonstrates a broad 

recognition by financial institutions of the value diversity and inclusion play in the financial 

services industry. The completion of the self-assessment will help your institution focus on and 

evaluate its diversity program, and can be a valuable planning tool for enhancements. The results 

will also showcase best practices and ideas that can be shared within the banking and financial 

services communities.

A diversity toolkit was developed to provide resources, including Frequently Asked Questions and 

Guidance to enable you to conduct a self-assessment. These resources, as well as the complete 

2016 and 2017 analyses, are available at https://www.fdic.gov/about/diversity/dibanking.html.

Please pass this information to your Chief Diversity Officer and/or Supplier Diversity Officer, or 

their equivalents. I urge all FDIC-regulated financial institutions with 100 or more employees to 

conduct a self-assessment against the Standards identified in the Policy Statement, and submit the 

assessment by the extended submission date of April 30, 2019 to Section342@fdic.gov.

For further information related to the Policy Statement and the submission of the diversity selfassessments, please contact me, Saul Schwartz, OMWI Director at (703) 562-2305, or by email at 

Section342@fdic.gov.

Sincerely,

Saul Schwartz

Director
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1827 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1827

   To extend the temporary suspension of duty on (Z)-(1RS,3RS)-3-(2-
 Chloro-3,3,3-trifluoro-1-propenyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylic 
                                 acid.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2005

  Mr. Cardin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend the temporary suspension of duty on (Z)-(1RS,3RS)-3-(2-
 Chloro-3,3,3-trifluoro-1-propenyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylic 
                                 acid.

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

SECTION 1. (Z)-(1RS,3RS)-3-(2-CHLORO-3,3,3-TRIFLUORO-1-PROPENYL)-2,2-
              DIMETHYLCYCLOPROPANECARBOXYLIC ACID.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.55 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

          I, Xiao Ping Zhang, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of SORL AUTO PARTS, INC. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of SORL AUTO PARTS, INC.

| Date:  May 12, 2006  |   |   |
|---------------------------|--------|--------|
|                      |   |   |
| /s/ Xiao   Ping Zhang     |   |   |
|                           |   |   |
| Xiao Ping   Zhang         |   |   |
| Chief   Executive Officer |   |   |
AO 450 (Rev. 10/09) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

ROBERT SZANYI )

V.

Plaintiff(s)

Civil Action No. 2:13 CV 190 RLM

)

)

STATE OF INDIANA, MEDICAID and )

INDIANA FAMILY SOCIAL SERVICES )

Defendant(s) )

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

 the plaintiff(s) recover from

the defendant(s) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes

prejudgment interest at the rate of %, plus postjudgment interest at the rate of %, along with costs.

the plaintiff(s) recover nothing, the action to be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant(s)

recover costs from the plaintiff(s)

.

other: This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

This action was (check one):

tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has rendered a verdict.

tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision was reached.

decided by Judge Robert L. Miller, Jr. on a motion for

.

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00190-RLM-PRC document 5 filed 06/06/13 page 1 of 2
Date June 06, 2013 CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

/s/ K Pastrick USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00190-RLM-PRC document 5 filed 06/06/13 page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2009 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2009

           To suspend temporarily the duty on Tetraconazole.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 28, 2005

 Mr. Price of North Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To suspend temporarily the duty on Tetraconazole.

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

SECTION 1. TETRACONAZOLE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.04.37       (+/-)-2-(2,4-      Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Dichlorophenyl)-3-                                                 31/2009
                         (1H-1,2,4-triazol-
                         1-yl) propyl,
                         1,1,2,2-
                         tetrafluoroethyl
                         ether
                         (Tetraconazole)
                         (CAS No. 112281-
                         77-3) (provided
                         for in subheading
                         2933.99.22)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 1 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 2 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 3 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 4 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 5 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 6 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 7 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 8 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 9 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 10 of 11
USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00207-TLS document 87 filed 08/01/16 page 11 of 11
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Alan H. Lund, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of International Lease FinanceCorporation;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor 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 report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;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 disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. 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 the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:May 14, 2007                                               /S/ Alan H. Lund   ALAN H. LUND   Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer  
-29-
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2003 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2003

To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to remove 
          the 100 percent tariff imposed on Roquefort cheese.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 28, 2005

Mr. Otter (for himself and Mr. Simpson) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to remove 
          the 100 percent tariff imposed on Roquefort cheese.

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

SECTION 1. REMOVAL OF 100 PERCENT TARIFF ON ROQUEFORT CHEESE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter III of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by striking heading 
9903.02.30.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--Chapter 4 of such Schedule is amended--
            (1) by striking footnote 1 to subheading 0406.40.20; and
            (2) by striking footnote 1 to subheading 0406.40.40.
                                 <all>
```
Daniel Eric COBBLE, petitioner, v. Gregory McLAUGHLIN, Warden.

No. 12-10459.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 18, 2013.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied.
#### K I N G S L E Y, Respondent, v. FINCH, PRUYN & CO., Inc., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

*1134November 13, 1907.)

Action by Albert M. Kingsley, as administrator, etc., of Howard M. Kingsley, deceased, against Finch, Pruyn & Co., incorporated.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order reversed, on the ground that there is no evidence of defendant’s negligence, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. See 54 Misc. Rep. 317, 105 N. Y. Supp. 968.

CHESTER and KELLOGG, JJ.,

concur in the reversal on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of evidence.