alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 18821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8093]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Interest Rates

    The Small Business Administration publishes an interest rate called 
the optional ``peg'' rate (13 CFR 120.214) on a quarterly basis. This 
rate is a weighted average cost of money to the government for 
maturities similar to the average SBA direct loan. This rate may be 
used as a base rate for guaranteed fluctuating interest rate SBA loans. 
This rate will be 3.750 (3\3/4\) percent for the April-June quarter of 
FY 2011.
    Pursuant to 13 CFR 120.921(b), the maximum legal interest rate for 
any third party lender's commercial loan which funds any portion of the 
cost of a 504 project (see 13 CFR 120.801) shall be 6% over the New 
York Prime rate or, if that exceeds the maximum interest rate permitted 
by the constitution or laws of a given State, the maximum interest rate 
will be the rate permitted by the constitution or laws of the given 
State.

Walter C. Intlekofer,
Acting Director, Office of Financial Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011-8093 Filed 4-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

Richmond Division

In re: Case No. 20-31408-KLP 

Gemini Realty LLC, 1

Debtor. Chapter 

11 

FINAL DECREE2

 Whereas, on March 12, 2020, the Debtor filed for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the 

United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”);

 Whereas, on June 10, 2020, the Debtor filed the Debtor’s Chapter 11 Small Business 

Subchapter V Plan, ECF No. 31;

 Whereas on August 6, 2020, the Court confirmed the Debtor’s SubV Plan, ECF No. 39; 

 Whereas the Effective Date of the Plan was August 21, 2020; 

 Whereas, the Reorganized Debtor has reported to this Court that the SubV Plan has been 

substantially consummated; 

Whereas, as of April 9, 2021, the services of Peter J. Barrett as Subchapter V Trustee were 

terminated pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1183(c); and 

Lynn L. Tavenner, Esquire (Va. Bar No. 30083)

Paula S. Beran, Esquire (Va. Bar No. 34679) 

Tavenner & Beran, PLC 

20 North Eighth Street, Second Floor 

Richmond, Virginia 23219 

Telephone: (804) 783-8300 

Telecopy: (804) 783-0178 

 Counsel for the Reorganized Debtor

1 The Debtor’s address is 10613 Sherwin Place, Glen Allen, Virginia 23059, and the Debtor’s EIN is 84-1710227. 2

 Capital terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning given to them in the Plan. 
Whereas, Rule 3022 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure provides for the entry 

of a Final Decree; it is THEREFORE 

ORDERED that the Final Report of the Reorganized Debtor is approved, and the Motion 

for Final Decree is granted; 

ORDERED that Peter J. Barrett as Subchapter V Trustee is hereby discharged; 

ORDERED that the bankruptcy case referenced above is closed as of the date of this Final 

Decree; and it is further 

 ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to forward a copy of this Final Decree to the 

Reorganized Debtor’s counsel and the Office of the United States Trustee.

ENTERED: 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE 

I ask for this: 

/s/ Paula S. Beran

Lynn L. Tavenner, Esquire (Va. Bar No. 30083) 

Paula S. Beran, Esquire (Va. Bar No. 34679) 

Tavenner & Beran, PLC 

20 North Eighth Street, Second Floor 

Richmond, Virginia 23219 

Telephone: (804) 783-8300 

Telecopy: (804) 783-0178 

Counsel for the Reorganized Debtor 

Jun 30 2021 /s/ Keith L Phillips

Entered On Docket: Jun 30 2021
Seen and not objected to: 

/s/ Shannon F. Pecoraro (signature approval received via email)

Shannon F. Pecoraro (Va. Bar No. 46864) 

Office of the United States Trustee 

701 East Broad Street, Suite 4304 

Richmond, Virginia 23219 

Tel: (804) 771-2310 

Fax: (804) 771-2330 

 Trial Attorney 

CERTIFICATION 

 I hereby certify that, pursuant to Local Rule 9022-1, this Final Decree has been endorsed 

by or served upon all necessary parties. 

/s/ Paula S. Beran

 Counsel 

SERVICE LIST FOR THE ENTERED ORDER 

Paula S. Beran, Esquire 

Tavenner & Beran, PLC 

20 North Eighth Street 

Second Floor 

Richmond, Virginia 23219
#### § 75.910 [Reserved]
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY

 472.59

 474.23

 474.98

 476.03

 477.27

 478.35

 479.56

 480.47

 481.92

 482.50

 483.45

 484.89

 485.86

 486.49

 487.03

 487.96

 488.58

 489.06

 489.46

 489.86

 489.71

 490.21

 490.90

 491.12

 492.00

 493.06

 494.91

 496.37

 497.73

 499.26

 499.79

 1,204,542

 1,222,023

 1,230,044

 1,241,322

 1,254,673

 1,266,340

 1,279,453

 1,289,345

 1,305,158

 1,311,502

 1,321,914

 1,337,749

 1,348,452

 1,355,418

 1,361,398

 1,371,719

 1,378,614

 1,383,960

 1,388,420

 1,392,886

 1,391,211

 1,396,797

 1,404,518

 1,406,982

 1,416,856

 1,428,780

 1,449,672

 1,466,232

 1,481,715

 1,499,200

 1,505,272

 7,688

 10,831

 5,769

 5,774

 8,085

 5,563

 5,512

 5,460

 13,285

 5,442

 5,468

 5,411

 5,049

 4,073

 3,833

 7,316

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1,813

 4,615

 7,273

 7,285

 4,883

 10,933

 4,131

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 7,037

 0

 0

 4,675

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

SAN LUIS RESERVOIR FEDERAL April 24, 2000

DAILY OPERATIONS

JANUARY 2000 RUN DATE:

FEDERAL

CHANGE CHANGE

PACHECO

PUMP

TOTALS 318,130 11,712 6,620 120,233

FEDERAL

PUMP ADJ

FEDERAL

GEN

 17,400

 17,481

 8,021

 11,278

 13,351

 11,667

 13,113

 9,892

 15,813

 6,344

 10,412

 15,835

 10,703

 6,966

 5,980

 10,321

 6,895

 5,346

 4,460

 4,466

-1,675

 5,586

 7,721

 2,464

 9,874

 11,924

 20,892

 16,560

 15,483

 17,485

 6,072

 60

 90

 188

 266

 283

 247

 226

 221

 218

 226

 207

 180

 198

 232

 265

 256

 241

 240

 225

 233

 238

 246

 248

 238

 174

 281

 183

 184

 181

 180

 165

7,377

10,357

5,191

5,268

7,411

4,995

4,971

4,955

12,749

4,980

4,978

5,063

4,402

3,665

3,432

6,718

-292

17

-373

-335

-7,438

-300

204

-4,790

1,391

4,110

6,524

6,665

4,337

10,401

3,600

ELEV STORAGE

 145,492

 477,090

 487,447

 492,638

 497,906

 505,317

 510,312

 515,283

 520,238

 532,987

 537,967

 542,945

 548,008

 552,410

 556,075

 559,507

 566,225

 565,933

 565,950

 565,577

 565,242

 557,804

 557,504

 557,708

 552,918

 554,309

 558,419

 564,943

 571,608

 575,945

 586,346

 589,946

FEDERAL

STORAGE

COMMENTS : 

VALUES IN ACRE-FEET

 469,713

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0
### §3911. Reports

#### (a) Annual reports

Not later than 1 year after April 25, 2003, and every 12 months thereafter for such period as this chapter is in effect, the President shall transmit to the Congress a report—

(1) describing actions taken by countries that have exported rough diamonds to the United States during the preceding 12-month period to control the exportation of the diamonds through the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme;

(2) describing whether there is statistical information or other evidence that would indicate efforts to circumvent the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, including cutting rough diamonds for the purpose of circumventing the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme;

(3) identifying each country that, during the preceding 12-month period, exported rough diamonds to the United States and was exporting rough diamonds not controlled through the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, if the failure to do so has significantly increased the likelihood that those diamonds not so controlled are being imported into the United States; and

(4) identifying any problems or obstacles encountered in the implementation of this chapter or the Kimberly 1 Process Certification Scheme.

#### (b) Semiannual reports

For each country identified in subsection (a)(3), the President, during such period as this chapter is in effect, shall, every 6 months after the initial report in which the country was identified, transmit to the Congress a report that explains what actions have been taken by the United States or such country since the previous report to ensure that diamonds the exportation of which was not controlled through the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme are not being imported from that country into the United States. The requirement to issue a semiannual report with respect to a country under this subsection shall remain in effect until such time as the country is controlling the importation and exportation of rough diamonds through the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme.

(Pub. L. 108–19, §12, Apr. 25, 2003, 117 Stat. 636.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

For effective date of this section, see section 15 of Pub. L. 108–19, set out as a note under section 3901 of this title.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Delegation of Functions

For assignment of functions of President under this section, see section 2 of Ex. Ord. No. 13312, July 29, 2003, 68 F.R. 45151, set out as a note under section 3901 of this title.

1 So in original. Probably should be "Kimberley".
No. 16,071.

#### Towbin, doing business as Denver Surgical Supply Company *v.*Van Schaack and Company.

(197 P. [2d] 159)

Decided August 9, 1948.

Rehearing denied August 30, 1948.

Mr. John E. Fitzpatrick, Mr. Anthony J. Pasquale, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Shuteran, Robinson & Harrington, for defendant in error.

Per Curiam.

Judgment affirmed en banc without written opinion, Mr. Justice Hilliard not participating.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ARACELY GOMEZ

,

A ppellant,

v

.

DAVID AVALOS AND WINGFOOT

ENTERPISES, INC. D/B/A

ALLEGIANCE STAFFING

,

A ppellees. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 7

- 00 236

- CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 6

o f El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 201 3 DC V3850 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

After the record and briefs were filed, we determined that the judgment was not final

because it did not dispose of all of the parties. Rather than dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction, the Court entered an order abating the appeal and remanding the cause to the trial

court to give the parties and trial court an opportunity to finalize the judgment. After multiple

extensions of time, a final judgment still has not been entered. Accordingly, we reinstate the

appeal.

Appellant, Aracely Gomez , has filed a motion to dismiss h er appeal because the judgment

is not final as to all parties. See T EX .R.A PP .P

. 42.1(a)(1). We grant the motion and dismiss the- 2

-

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. All pending motions are denied. Costs of the appeal are taxed

against Appellant. T EX .R.A PP .P. 42.1(d).

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

June 5, 2019

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
485 P.2d 357

#### STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Wesley PAUL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 9260.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

May 19, 1971.

Original Proceeding in Certiorari

Ordered that petition for writ of certiorari be and the same is hereby denied.

Further ordered that the record in Court of Appeals Cause No. 566, 82 N.M. 619, 485 P.2d 375, be and the same is hereby returned to the Clerk of the Court of Appeals.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 159

 175

 167

 188

 194

 196

 502

 342

 399

 442

 336

 294

 261

 271

 257

 302

 338

 517

 610

 587

 380

 348

 388

 429

 456

 454

 473

 763

 1,195

 1,748

 1,672

 119

 114

 113

 113

 115

 116

 117

 121

 122

 124

 132

 132

 131

 132

 133

 134

 135

 136

 136

 139

 141

 141

 141

 140

 138

 136

 136

 135

 142

 155

 158

 130

 129

 129

 129

 130

 131

 156

 152

 157

 182

 174

 168

 164

 160

 169

 180

 177

 199

 223

 218

 181

 175

 202

 210

 222

 231

 227

 281

 352

 524

 500

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2017 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: November 14, 2017

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 1,943

 1,908

 1,883

 1,863

 1,846

 1,834

 1,852

 1,868

 1,891

 1,939

 1,983

 2,025

 2,062

 2,091

 2,130

 2,181

 2,229

 2,299

 2,392

 2,479

 2,504

 2,527

 2,572

 2,600

 2,648

 2,711

 2,774

 2,895

 3,078

 3,422

 3,745

 139

 136

 135

 133

 132

 131

 132

 133

 135

 139

 142

 145

 147

 149

 152

 156

 159

 164

 171

 177

 179

 181

 184

 186

 189

 194

 198

 207

 220

 244

 268

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
#### §§ 668.6-668.7 [Reserved]
§ 97.115 IRB Records. ( a ) An institution, or when appropriate an IRB, shall prepare and maintain adequate documentation of IRB activities, including the following: ( 1 ) Copies of all research proposals reviewed, scientific evaluations, if any, that accompany the proposals, approved sample consent forms, progress reports submitted by investigators, and reports of injuries to subjects.
( 2 ) Minutes of IRB meetings, which shall be in sufficient detail to show attendance at the meetings; actions taken by the IRB; the vote on these actions including the number of members voting for, against, and abstaining; the basis for requiring changes in or disapproving research; and a written summary of the discussion of controverted issues and their resolution.
( 3 ) Records of continuing review activities, including the rationale for conducting continuing review of research that otherwise would not require continuing review as described in § 97.109(f)(1).
( 4 ) Copies of all correspondence between the IRB and the investigators.
( 5 ) A list of IRB members in the same detail as described in § 97.108(a)(2).
( 6 ) Written procedures for the IRB in the same detail as described in § 97.108(a)(3) and (4).
( 7 ) Statements of significant new findings provided to subjects, as required by § 97.116(c)(5).
( 8 ) The rationale for an expedited reviewer's determination under § 97.110(b)(1)(i) that research appearing on the expedited review list described in § 97.110(a) is more than minimal risk.
( 9 ) Documentation specifying the responsibilities that an institution and an organization operating an IRB each will undertake to ensure compliance with the requirements of this policy, as described in § 97.103(e).
( b ) The records required by this policy shall be retained for at least 3 years, and records relating to research that is conducted shall be retained for at least 3 years after completion of the research. The institution or IRB may maintain the records in printed form, or electronically. All records shall be accessible for inspection and copying by authorized representatives of the Federal department or agency at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0990-0260)
#### Lawrence Vix v. Frank E. Whyman.

Filed March 8, 1899.

No. 8797.

1. Review: Assignments oe Error. Alleged error in the admission of evidence of which there is no assignment in the petition in error will not be examined.

*1912. Sales: Action by Purchaser to Recover Overpayment: Verdict eor I’laintiee. Evidence *held*sufficient to sustain the verdict.

3. Allegations and Proof: Variance: Review. A variance between the allegations of the petition and the proof on an immaterial point does not furnish cause for reversal of a judgment.

Error from the district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Hall, J.

*Affirmed.*

*J61m P. Maulé,*for plaintiff in error.

*A. P. Eoicard*and *J. G. McNerney, contra.*

Harrison, C. J.

This action was instituted by the defendant in error to recover an amount which he claimed he had overpaid the plaintiff in error in the purchase from the latter of some hogs. The overpayment, it was alleged, was made by reason of a mistake in the computation of the weight of the hogs at the time they were delivered to defendant in error. The answer was a general denial. The result of a trial was a judgment for defendant in error, the reversal of which is sought in an error proceeding to this court.

It is argued that there was an erroneous admission of evidence .during the trial. 'Of this subject there will be no examination, since in regard to it there is no assignment of error. *(Grand Island & W. C. R. Co. v. Swinbank,*51 Neb. 521.)

Of the argument that the verdict was not supported by the evidence it must be said that an examination of the evidence reveals a sufficiency thereof to fully sustain the verdict, and it follows that it will not be disturbed. *(Ashland Land & Live Stock Co. v. May,*51 Neb. 474.)

The petition declared upon a payment based npon a mistake in the aggregate of the weights of a “couple of loads of hogs.” The evidence disclosed that the hogs were hauled to the station in three wagons and the weights were of the three loads and not of a “couple” (or *192two) as stated, in the petition. It is urged that the evidence in relation to the three loads does not tend to establish the allegations of the petition, which, as we before set forth, were with reference to a “couple of loads.” The evidence of both parties was in regard to a sale of sixteen hogs, the weight, and a mistake therein which, it was asserted for defendant in error, resulted in the overpayment. That the hogs were hauled in two or three wagons, or that there were any particular number of loads, was not a material point of the litigated issues; hence that the petition was in terms of a “couple of loads” and the evidence showed three could not affect the final decision of the rights of the parties. The judgment must be

Affirmed.
### §2137. Reservation of articles for national security or other reasons

#### (a) National security considerations

No proclamation shall be made pursuant to the provisions of this chapter reducing or eliminating the duty or other import restriction on any article if the President determines that such reduction or elimination would threaten to impair the national security.

#### (b) Action taken under other laws

While there is in effect with respect to any article any action taken under section 2253 of this title, or section 1862 or 1981 of this title, the President shall reserve such article from negotiations under this subchapter (and from any action under section 2132(c) of this title) contemplating reduction or elimination of—

(A) any duty on such article,

(B) any import restriction imposed under such section, or

(C) any other import restriction, the removal of which will be likely to undermine the effect of the import restrictions referred to in subparagraph (B).

In addition, the President shall also so reserve any other article which he determines to be appropriate, taking into consideration information and advice available pursuant to and with respect to the matters covered by sections 2151, 2152, and 2153 of this title, where applicable.

(Pub. L. 93–618, title I, §127(a), (b), Jan. 3, 1975, 88 Stat. 1993.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsec. (a), was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 93–618, Jan. 3, 1975, 88 Stat. 1978, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see References in Text note set out under section 2101 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Section is comprised of subsecs. (a) and (b) of section 127 of act Jan. 3, 1975. Subsec. (c) of such section was classified to section 1863 of this title, prior to its repeal by Pub. L. 100–418, title I, §1501(b)(2), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1259, and subsec. (d) amended section 1862 of this title.
#### § 79.2 What definitions apply to these regulations?

###### Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 70343, Aug. 29, 2024.

*Department* means the U.S. Department of Education.

*Order* means Executive Order 12372, issued July 14, 1982, amended April 8, 1983, and titled “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.”

*Secretary* means the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education or an official or employee of the Department acting for the Secretary under a delegation of authority.

*State* means any of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.

(Authority: E.O. 12372)
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

Eastern District of Virginia 

Norfolk Division 

 

In re: Sandra M. Jones

Debtor 

Case No. 21-70890-SCS 

Chapter 7 

CERTIFICATION REGARDING REAFFIRMATION AGREEMENT 

 In support of the reaffirmation agreement filed by Santander Consumer USA Inc. 

I hereby certify that I have confirmed the following with the Debtor in this matter: 

1. The Debtor is in possession of the 2017 Dodge Journey securing the debt 

to be reaffirmed. 

2. The vehicle is in good condition. 

3. The payments on the debt to be reaffirmed are current. 

4. The vehicle has full coverage insurance with Geico and Santander 

Consumer USA Inc. is listed as the loss payee/lienholder on the policy. 

 

 Sandra M. Jones

 

 By: /s/ Barry W. Spear_____ 

Barry W. Spear (VSB#39152) 

Boleman Law Firm, P.C. 

Convergence Center III 

272 Bendix Road, Suite 330 

Virginia Beach, VA 23452 

Telephone (757) 313-3000 

Counsel for Debtor 

Case 21-70890-SCS Doc 14 Filed 07/28/21 Entered 07/28/21 11:21:24 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 1
### §§289 to 292. Repealed. Pub. L. 103–182, title VI, §690(a)(1), (5)–(7), Dec. 8, 1993, 107 Stat. 2222, 2223

Section 289, R.S. §2792; May 28, 1908, ch. 212, §1, 35 Stat. 424, exempted certain ferryboats and passenger vessels from clearance fees.

Section 290, R.S. §3122, mandated that master of any enrolled or licensed vessel destined with cargo from a place in the United States, at which there may be no customhouse, to a port where there may be a customhouse, deliver a manifest within twenty-four hours after arriving at port of destination.

Section 291, R.S. §3124; Feb. 14, 1903, ch. 552, §10, 32 Stat. 829; 1946 Reorg. Plan No. 3, §§101–104, eff. July 16, 1946, 11 F.R. 7875, 60 Stat. 1097, related to format and content of forms for manifests, certificates of clearance, and oaths.

Section 292, R.S. §3125, related to penalty for neglect or failure to comply with sections 286, 287, 290, and 291 of this title.