alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION IV

 611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

 Arlington TX 76011-8064

No. IV-02-022 April 16, 2002

CONTACT: Breck Henderson E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov

Phone: 817-860-8128

Cellular: 817-917-1227

NRC TO MEET WITH AMERENUE

TO DISCUSS SAFETY PERFORMANCE AT CALLAWAY

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of

AmerenUE/Union Electric Co. on Monday, April 22, to discuss the results of the agency’s annual

assessment of safety performance at Callaway nuclear power plant. The facility is located near Fulton,

Missouri, and is operated by AmerenUE.

The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 

7 p.m. at Capitol Plaza Hotel, 415 McCarty St., Jefferson City. NRC staff will be available before the

meeting is adjourned to answer any questions from the public.

A letter sent from NRC Region IV to AmerenUE addresses plant performance during the

period April 1 to December 31, 2001, and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is

available on the NRC web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/call_2001q4.pdf.

Current performance information for Callaway is available on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CALL/call_chart.html.

###
<Page>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders
CellPoint Inc. and Subsidiaries
Chertsey, England

    We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the respective
Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-52942) and Form S-8
(No. 333-52884) of CellPoint Inc. and in the Prospectuses constituting part of
such Registration Statements of our report dated August 21, 2001 (except for
note 9(b) as to which the date is September 26, 2001 and note 17 as to which the
date is October 9, 2001) relating to the financial statements of CellPoint Inc.
appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
June 30, 2001.

    We also consent to the references to us under the caption "Experts" in the
Prospectuses.

BDO Seidman, LLP

New York, New York
October 17, 2001
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-23287-CIV-GAYLES/OTAZO-REYES

LUIS MANUEL RODRIGUEZ, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

 

IMPERIAL BRANDS PLC, et al., 

 Defendants. 

______________________________________/ 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR AN ORDER SETTING COORDINATED 

MOTION TO DISMISS PROCEDURE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on the Joint Motion of Plaintiffs and 

Defendants Imperial Brands plc (“Imperial”), WPP plc, Young & Rubicam LLC, BCW LLC (the 

“WPP Defendants”), and Corporación Habanos, S.A. (“Habanos”) (collectively, the 

“Defendants”) for an Order Setting Coordinated Motion to Dismiss Procedure and Briefing 

Schedule (the “Motion”), and good cause appearing therefore, it is ORDERED AND 

ADJUDGED that the Motion is GRANTED. The Parties shall adhere to the following deadlines 

and procedures:

1. The Defendants’ deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the Second Amended 

Complaint shall be April 20, 2022.

a. Defendants shall file a Consolidated Motion to Dismiss, making arguments 

common to all Defendants, not to exceed twenty-five (25) pages.

b. While Defendants will work collaboratively to consolidate briefing on as many 

relevant issues as possible, Imperial (individually), the WPP Defendants 

(together), and Habanos (individually) shall have the option of filing separate

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 216 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/22/2022 Page 1 of 2
2 

motions and memoranda of law on their individualized arguments. The 

Defendants may file separate memoranda of law on their individualized 

argumentsto address any additional arguments that the Defendants wish to raise 

that are not contained in the Consolidated Motion arguments, including, but not 

limited to, particularized arguments relating to jurisdiction. 

2. Plaintiffs’ deadline to file a Response to the Consolidated Motion to Dismiss and 

Imperial’s and the WPP Defendants’ individual motions set forth in Paragraph 1 above shall be 

May 11, 2022. Plaintiffs’ Responses to the Defendants’ Consolidated Motion to Dismiss shall not 

exceed twenty-five (25) pages. 

3. Defendants shall be permitted to file a Reply in support of the Consolidated 

Motion to Dismiss, not to exceed fifteen (15) pages, by May 25, 2022. 

4. Imperial and the WPP Defendants shall be permitted to file Replies in support of 

their individual motions by May 25, 2022. 

5. Plaintiffs’ deadline to file a Response to Habanos’ individual motion to dismiss 

or, in the alternative, for a more definite statement set forth in Paragraph 1 above shall be May 25, 

2022. 

6. Habanos shall be permitted to file a Reply in support of its individual motion by 

June 10, 2022. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida, this 22nd 

day of March, 2022. 

____________________________________ 

ALICIA M. OTAZO-REYES

United States Magistrate Judge 

Copies furnished via CM/ECF to Counsel of Record 

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 216 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/22/2022 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32

Certification pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

John S. Long, President and Chief Executive Officer, and John M. Digby, Chief Financial
Officer and Treasurer, of Great Pee Dee Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) each certify in his capacity as an officer of the Company that he has reviewed the Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the year
ended June 30, 2007 and that to the best of his knowledge:



|1. | the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) 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 Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Great Pee Dee Bancorp, Inc. and
will be retained by Great Pee Dee Bancorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|                       |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: October 24, 2007 |  | /s/ John S. Long                     
|                       |  | John S. Long                         
|                       |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                       | 
|Date: October 24, 2007 |  | /s/ John M. Digby                    
|                       |  | John M. Digby                        
|                       |  | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Exhibit 23

                              PUGH & COMPANY, P.C.
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
WILL J. PUGH, CPA
RONNIE G. CATE, CPA    HOME FEDERAL PLAZA - SUITE 200          MEMBERS
C. LARRY ELMORE, CPA     315 NORTH CEDAR BLUFF ROAD
W. JAMES PUGH, JR., CPA  KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE 37923      AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
DANIEL C. FRANKLIN, CPA                             CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
JAMES H. JONES, CPA
LISA W. HILL, CPA             P.O. BOX 31409             TENNESSEE SOCIETY OF
SUSAN R. FOARD, CPA     KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE 37930-1409      CERTIFIED PUBLIC
ANDREW R. HARPER, CPA                                          ACCOUNTANTS
                          865-769-0660 800-332-7021
                           TELECOPIER 865-769-1660



                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



The Board of Directors and Shareholders
United Tennessee Bankshares, Inc.
Newport, Tennessee

We consent to  incorporation  by reference in the  Registration  Statement  (No.
333-41571 and 333-82803) on Form S-8 of United Tennessee Bankshares, Inc. of our
report dated  February  27, 2003,  relating to the  consolidated  statements  of
financial  condition of United Tennessee  Bankshares,  Inc. and subsidiary as of
December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related  consolidated  statements of income,
comprehensive  income,  changes in shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each
of the years in the  three-year  period ended  December  31, 2003,  which report
appears  in the  December  31,  2003  annual  report  on Form  10-KSB  of United
Tennessee Bankshares, Inc. and subsidiary.


                                    /s/ Pugh & Company, P.C.

                                    Certified Public Accountants
                                    Knoxville, Tennessee
                                    March 25, 2004
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6860

MACHOT KUOL MAYEN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of 

Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior

District Judge. (1:11-cv-01018-CMH-TCB)

Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: October 2, 2012

Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Machot Kuol Mayen, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Misbach, OFFICE OF 

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Machot Kuol Mayen seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Mayen has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny the pending motions for a certificate of appealability and 

the appointment of counsel, deny leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before the court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
#### § 148.116 Claim for refund.

Any person who has filed a declaration of unaccompanied articles under §§ 148.112 and 148.113 and who is dissatisfied with the amount of duty assessed on the articles upon their arrival in the United States may file a claim for administrative review under subpart C, part 145, of this chapter if the articles arrived by mail, or under parts 173 and 174 if the articles arrived other than by mail. Any supporting documents, including a copy of Customs Form 255, should be submitted with the claim.

[T.D. 78-394, 43 FR 49790, Oct. 25, 1978; 43 FR 55758, Nov. 29, 1978]
### §23. Length of claims on veins or lodes

Mining claims upon veins or lodes of quartz or other rock in place bearing gold, silver, cinnabar, lead, tin, copper, or other valuable deposits, located prior to May 10, 1872, shall be governed as to length along the vein or lode by the customs, regulations, and laws in force at the date of their location. A mining claim located after the 10th day of May 1872, whether located by one or more persons, may equal, but shall not exceed, one thousand five hundred feet in length along the vein or lode; but no location of a mining claim shall be made until the discovery of the vein or lode within the limits of the claim located. No claim shall extend more than three hundred feet on each side of the middle of the vein at the surface, nor shall any claim be limited by any mining regulation to less than twenty-five feet on each side of the middle of the vein at the surface, except where adverse rights existing on the 10th day of May 1872 render such limitation necessary. The end lines of each claim shall be parallel to each other.

(R.S. §2320.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §2320 derived from act May 10, 1872, ch. 152, §2, 17 Stat. 91.
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The ACRS Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal will hold a meeting on November 3, 2004, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 

The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. 

The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: 

### Wednesday, November 3, 2004—1:30 p.m.-5 p.m. 

The purpose of this meeting is to review the License Renewal Application and associated Draft Safety Evaluation Report (SER) related to the License Renewal of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Station. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, Southern Nuclear Operating Company, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. 

Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Cayetano Santos (telephone 301/415-7270) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. 

                    Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between                           ( print page 62466)                        7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda.                 

Dated: October 19, 2004. 

John H. Flack, 

Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. 

[FR Doc. 04-23901 Filed 10-25-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Clayton Homer Bruno v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 13

- 00380

- CR

01

- 13

- 00381

- CR

Trial court case number: 1330602

1330604

Trial court: 179th Dist rict Court of Harris County



### On October 18, 2013

, Nicole DeBorde filed a motion to substitute as attorney of

record in the above

- referenced appeal s . Appellant is presently represe nted by Keisha L.

Smith . The motion states that appellant wishes to substit ute , and certi fies that a copy of the motion was mailed to all parties and to appellant . No objection to the motion has

been filed.

The motion is granted

. Nicole DeBorde is substituted as appellant’s counsel of record in place of Keisha L. Smith.

On October 15, 2013, Keisha L. Smith filed a motion to withdraw as appellant’s

counsel. The motion is dismissed as moot

.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: October 29, 2013
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 198 (Thursday, October 14, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 61066]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23044]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 4820]


Announcement of meetings of the International Telecommunication 
Advisory Committee

    Summary: The International Telecommunication Advisory Committee 
(ITAC) will meet on Wednesday, October 27, 2004, 2-4 p.m., at a 
Washington location to be announced. A detailed agenda and the meeting 
location will be published on the e-mail reflector <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4e3e2d2d27632d273a2b220e2b2c22273d3a603d3a2f3a2b60292138"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="275744444e0a444e53424b6742454b4e545309545346534209404851">[email protected]</span></a> and <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8efeedede7e7a3ede7faebe2ceebece2e7fdfaa0fdfaeffaeba0e9e1f8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="265645454f4f0b454f52434a6643444a4f555208555247524308414950">[email protected]</span></a>. The meeting is 
being held to prepare positions for the upcoming meeting of the 
Permanent Executive Committee of the Inter-American Telecommunication 
Commission (November 30-December 3, 2004).
    Members of the public will be admitted to the extent that seating 
is available, and may join in the discussions, subject to the 
instructions of the Chair. Those desiring to attend the meeting who are 
not on this list may request the information from the Secretariat at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e78a8e898695838d82a79493869382c9808891"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a7cacec9c6d5c3cdc2e7d4d3c6d3c289c0c8d1">[email protected]</span></a>. Directions to the meeting location may be obtained 
by calling the ITAC Secretariat at (202) 647-2592 or e-mail to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f69b959599849d9a939892b68582978293d8919980"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="670a040408150c0b02090327141306130249000811">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: October 6, 2004.
Doreen McGirr,
Director, ITU Telecommunication Development Affairs, International 
Communications & Information Policy, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 04-23044 Filed 10-13-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-45-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
The Names and Address of the Applicant is:

Mixed Media Solutions, LLC

DBA: Alienworx

Mark Nguyen | Mark Addona | James West

7214 Golden Isles Way

Savannah, GA 31410

(912) 662

- 5015

December 2 , 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

RE: Exemption Request under Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and 14 CFR

Part 11

Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 4108

Dear Sir or Madam:

We have been asked to provide the following information about the propos ed types of UAS that we will be utilizing.

Please find below the info rmation that has been requested:

1. Make: DJI

Model: Phantom 3 Professional

Type: R otorcraft / Quadcopter

Maximum Weight ( including payload): 1280g

2. Make: DJI

Model: Inspire 1 Pro

Type: R otorcraft / Quadcopter

Maximum Weight ( including payload): 3400 g

3. Make: DJI

Model: Spreading Wings S1000+A2+Zenmuse Z15

- GH4 (HD)

Type: R otorcraft / Octocopter

Maximum Weight ( including payload): 6350 g

4. Make: DJI

Model: Spreading Wings S 90 0+A2+Zenmuse Z15

- GH4 (HD)

Type: R otorcraft / Hexacopter

Maximum Weight ( including payload): 5250 g

5. Make: DJI

Model: Matrice 100

Type: R otorcraft / Quadcopter

Maximum Weight ( including payload): 3400g

Thank you,

Mark Nguyen, Co

- Owner | Mark Addona, Co

- Owner | James West, Co

- Owner

Mixed Media Solutions, LLC | DBA: Mixed Media Solutions, LLC

7214 Golden Isles Way, Savannah, GA 31410

(912) 662

- 5015

info@alienworx.media
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

Arlington, Texas 76011-8064

CONTACT: Jan Strasma, (630) 829-9663

E-MAIL: opa3@nrc.gov

RIII-99-49

December 10, 1999

NRC STAFF ISSUES CONFIRMATORY ORDER TO MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIST

FOR DELIBERATE MISCONDUCT AT MICHIGAN HOSPITAL

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has issued a confirmatory order to a medical

technologist at the MidMichigan Medical Center, Midland, Michigan, as a result of deliberate

misconduct associated with administering radiation therapy to a patient.

The Order, issued to John Urban, requires that, should he seek other employment in

NRC-licensed activities during the next two years, he provide a copy of the Order to a

prospective employer. If he accepts employment in NRC-licensed activities, he is required to

notify the NRC. Mr. Urban has agreed to the terms of the Order.

An NRC investigation determined that Mr. Urban had administered the incorrect

radiation dosage to a patient being treated for thyroid cancer on May 24. The patient was to

receive a 150-millicurie dose of radioactive iodine-131. Mr. Urban did not review the

physician's written directive for the procedure and administered a prepared dose of approximately

100 millicuries.

When he discovered the error, he altered the written directive, changing the intended

dosage from 150 millicuries to 100 millicuries. Two days later, the patient's physician

discovered that the written directive had been changed.

The physician reviewed the lower dosage and determined that no additional treatment was

required. The patient's condition will continue to be monitored.

On June 1, the hospital notified the NRC of the error in the dose administered.

Subsequently, Mr. Urban provided inaccurate and incomplete information to an NRC inspector,

denying that he had changed the written directive.

He also failed to inform hospital management of the error, and, as a result, the hospital

did not report the medical misadministration to the NRC in a timely manner, as required.
"The NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and its employees to comply with NRC

requirements," the Order to Mr. Urban states. "Mr. Urban's actions have raised serious doubt as

to whether he can be relied upon to comply with NRC requirements and provide complete and

accurate information to the NRC."

In addition to the Confirmatory Order to Mr. Urban, the NRC issued a Notice of

Violation to the MidMichigan Medical Center for violations associated with Mr. Urban's actions.

A fine of $2,750 was considered for the violations, but no fine was proposed because the hospital

discovered the violations and took comprehensive corrective actions.

Mr. Urban remains employed by the hospital. During the next two years, the hospital has

committed to having all work performed by Mr. Urban in NRC-licensed activities supervised and

checked by another technologist.

#####