alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 228 (Monday, November 29, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 69395]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26219]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Government Electronics & Information Technology 
Association

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 15, 2004, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Government Electronics & 
Information Technology Association (``GEIA'') has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of 
business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature 
and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications 
were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting 
the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances.
    Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place 
of business of the standards development organization is: Government 
Electronics & Information Technology Association, Arlington, VA. The 
nature and scope of GEIA's standards development activities are: 
standards focused on business, management, modeling and processes. 
These include those functions associated with the design, manufacture, 
and integration of electronics and information technology systems, 
products, and their interoperability.

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 04-26219 Filed 11-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
**Exhibit23.1**

 

Consent ofIndependent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-128319) and inthe Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-131462) of our report datedMarch 8, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial statements andschedule of Eschelon Telecom, Inc., Eschelon Telecom, Inc., management’sassessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,and the effectiveness of  internalcontrol over financial reporting of Eschelon Telecom, Inc., included in thisAnnual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

Minneapolis, Minnesota

March 9, 2007

----
ABN AMRO

ABN AMRO Mortgage Group, Inc.

4242 North Harlem Avenue

Norridge, Illinois 60706 1283

www.mortgage.com

Management's Assertion on Compliance with the Minimum Servicing

Standards Set Forth in the *Uniform Single Attestation Program for
Mortgage Bankers

Report of Management

 

We, as members of management of ABN AMRO Mortgage Group, Inc. (AAMG, a wholly owned subsidiary of LaSalle Bank Corporation) are responsible for complying with the minimum servicing standards as set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's *Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers* (USAP). We are also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with these standards. We have performed an evaluation of AAMG's compliance with the minimum servicing standards as set forth in the USAP as of December 31, 2002 and for the year then ended. Based on this evaluation, we assert that during the year ended December 31, 2002, AAMG complied, in all material respects, with the minimum servicing standards set forth in the USAP except as described below.

Escrow funds were not returned to mortgagors within 30 calendar days of payoff for 2 out of the 25 loans tested.

As of and for this same period, LaSalle Bank Corporation had in effect a fidelity bond in  the amount of $500,000,000 and an error and omissions policy in the amount of $25,000,000.

 

 
*Stanley Rhodes				
Stanley Rhodes					

President					
*Richard Geary

Richard Geary

Group Senior Vice President

 

January 20, 2003

 

 

 

 

 

 

Affiliate Banks and Other Lending Offices: ABN AMRO Mortgage, LaSalle Bank N.A., LaSalle Home Mortgage, Standard Federal Bank NA***
#### § 1502.29 Time and place of prehearing conference.

A prehearing conference will commence at the date, time, and place announced in the notice of hearing, or in a later notice, or as specified by the presiding officer in a notice modifying a prior notice. At the prehearing conference, insofar as practicable at that time, the presiding officer will establish the methods and procedures to be used in developing the evidence, determine reasonable time periods for the conduct of the hearing, and designate the times and places for the production of witnesses for direct and cross-examination, if leave to conduct oral examination is granted on any issue.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-10709

Conference Calendar

 

ERIC DESHUN WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE;

DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:97-CV-1041-X

- - - - - - - - - -

October 30, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Eric Deshun Williams (TDCJ #777518) appeals the dismissal as

frivolous of his pro se and in forma pauperis (IFP) civil rights

complaint. Williams argued in the complaint that his

constitutional rights were violated when he “illegally” was

transferred to TDCJ custody while his direct appeal was still

pending.
No. 97-10709

-2-

 We have reviewed the record and Williams’s brief and find no

reversible error relating to Williams’s illegal-transfer claim. 

Accordingly, we AFFIRM for the reasons stated by the magistrate

judge and adopted by the district court. Williams v. Dallas

County District Attorney’s Office, et al., No. 3-97-CV-1041-X

(N.D. Tex., June 17, 1997). Insofar as Williams’s complaint

raised any additional issues, Williams has abandoned them by

failing to assert them on appeal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County

Deputy Sheriff Abner, 815 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

 AFFIRMED.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3637 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

401 Old Dixie Highway in Jupiter, Florida, as the ‘‘Roy Schallern 

Rood Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 12, 2011 

Mr. ROONEY (for himself, Mr. NUGENT, Mr. YOUNG of Florida, Mr. DIAZBALART, Mr. WEST, Mr. RIVERA, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. WEBSTER, Mrs. 

ADAMS, Mr. POSEY, Mr. STEARNS, Ms. CASTOR of Florida, Ms. BROWN

of Florida, Mr. DEUTCH, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, Mr. MICA, Mr. 

CRENSHAW, Mr. BUCHANAN, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Ms. ROSLEHTINEN, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, and Mr. 

MACK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 401 Old Dixie Highway in Jupiter, Florida, 

as the ‘‘Roy Schallern Rood Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. ROY SCHALLERN ROOD POST OFFICE BUILD4 ING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 401 Old Dixie Highway in JupiVerDate Mar 15 2010 00:56 Dec 17, 2011 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3637.IH H3637

smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3637 IH

1 ter, Florida, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Roy 

2 Schallern Rood Post Office Building’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Roy Schallern Rood 

7 Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
### §12527. Participation of students and teachers from private schools

#### (a) In general

To the extent consistent with the number of students in the State, in the territory, or served by the Indian tribe or in the school district of the local educational agency involved who are enrolled in private nonprofit elementary schools and secondary schools, such State, territory, or Indian tribe, or agency shall (after consultation with appropriate private school representatives) make provision—

(1) for the inclusion of services and arrangements for the benefit of such students so as to allow for the equitable participation of such students in the programs implemented to carry out the objectives and provide the benefits described in this part; and

(2) for the training of the teachers of such students so as to allow for the equitable participation of such teachers in the programs implemented to carry out the objectives and provide the benefits described in this part.

#### (b) Waiver

If a State, territory, Indian tribe, or local educational agency is prohibited by law from providing for the participation of students or teachers from private nonprofit schools as required by subsection (a), or if the Corporation determines that a State, territory, Indian tribe, or local educational agency substantially fails or is unwilling to provide for such participation on an equitable basis, the Chief Executive Officer shall waive such requirements and shall arrange for the provision of services to such students and teachers.

(Pub. L. 101–610, title I, §115, as added Pub. L. 111–13, title I, §1201, Apr. 21, 2009, 123 Stat. 1473.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 12527, Pub. L. 101–610, title I, §115, as added Pub. L. 103–82, title I, §103(a)(2), Sept. 21, 1993, 107 Stat. 830, related to consideration of applications, prior to the general amendment of this part by Pub. L. 111–13.

Another prior section 12527, Pub. L. 101–610, title I, §117, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 3138; Pub. L. 102–10, §4(5), Mar. 12, 1991, 105 Stat. 30, prescribed authorized uses of funds, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–82, §103(a)(2).

A prior section 115 of Pub. L. 101–610 was classified to section 12525 of this title prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–82.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 2009, see section 6101(a) of Pub. L. 111–13, set out as an Effective Date of 2009 Amendment note under section 4950 of this title.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-40274

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

VICTOR HUGO LUCERO-SIMENTAL, also known as, Mario Reyes-Simental,

also known as, Rudolfo Simental,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:07-CR-593-1

Before KING, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Victor HugoLucero-Simental appeals from his conviction of illegal reentry

following deportation. Lucero-Simental contends solely that his ninety-sixmonth sentence was unreasonable.

Lucero-Simental did not object to his sentence or raise the same

arguments in the district court that he advanced in favor of the sentence he

requested. His contentions arguably should be reviewed for plain error. See

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

January 6, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-40274

2

United States v. Willingham, 497 F.3d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 2007) (stating that

arguments not presented to the district court are reviewed for plain error). But

see United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 564 (5th Cir. 2008) (declining

to decide the standard of review when the defendant failed to object to the

procedural reasonableness of his sentence), cert. denied, 77 U.S.L.W. 3324 (U.S.

Dec. 1, 2008) (No. 08-5226).

The sentence of ninety-six months was within Lucero-Simental’s guideline

sentencing range and therefore is entitled to a presumption of reasonableness.

See United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir. 2008) (per

curiam), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 328 (2008). The district court provided sufficient

reasons for the sentence, addressing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), see

Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2468 (2007); accordingly,Lucero-Simental

has failed to demonstrate error, plain or otherwise.

AFFIRMED.
FILED

April 1, 1999

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

MARCH SESSION, 1998

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. NO. 02C01-9709-CC-00341

)

Appellee, )

)

) HENRY COUNTY

VS. )

) HON. JULIAN P. GUINN

JAMES ROBERT FIELDS, ) JUDGE

)

Appellant. ) (Direct Appeal - Class B Misdemeanor

) Assault)

CONCURRING OPINION

I agree that the conviction should be affirmed. Assault is not a lesser

included or lesser grade offense of statutory rape. I disagree, however, with

footnote 3 which suggests that a special request by the defendant for an instruction

on a lesser offense would serve to amend the indictment. See State v. Leland Ray

Reeves, No. 01C01-9711-CR-00515 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Nashville, Mar. 23,

1999). 

_________________________________

Gary R. Wade, Presiding Judge
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 26, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
130605 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STAT E OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 130605 COA: 258347 Genesee CC: 04-013625-FC TYRESE COLEMAN BUGGS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 12, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l0619 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 26, 2006

Clerk
#### § 1145.1 Scope.

In this part 1145, the Commission establishes rules which provide that risks of injury associated with consumer products that could be eliminated or reduced to a sufficient extent by action under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA) (15 U.S.C. 1261-1274), the Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970 (PPPA) (15 U.S.C. 1471-1476), or the Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA) (15 U.S.C. 1191-1204) will be regulated under the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) (15 U.S.C. 2051-2081). Section 30(d) of the CPSA, as amended, provides that a risk of injury which is associated with a consumer product and which could be eliminated or reduced to a sufficient extent by action under the FHSA, PPPA, or the FFA may be regulated under this act only if the Commission by rule finds it is in the public interest to regulate such risk of injury under this act.

[42 FR 44192, Sept. 1, 1977]
§ 1272.3 Approved markings. The following markings are approved by the Consumer Product Safety Commission: ( a ) A blaze orange (AMS STD 595A-17 color 12199) or orange color brighter than that specified by the AMS standard color number, solid plug permanently affixed to the muzzle end of the barrel as an integral part of the entire device and recessed no more than 6 millimeters from the muzzle end of the barrel.
( b ) A blaze orange (AMS STD 595A-17 color 12199) or orange color brighter than that specified by the AMS standard color number, marking permanently affixed to the exterior surface of the barrel, covering the circumference of the barrel from the muzzle end for a depth of at least 6 millimeters.
( c ) Construction of the device entirely of transparent or translucent materials which permits unmistakable observation of the device's complete contents.
( d ) Coloration of the entire exterior surface of the device in white, bright red, bright orange, bright yellow, bright green, bright blue, bright pink, or bright purple, either singly or as the predominant color in combination with other colors in any pattern.
( e ) SAE AMS STD 595A-17, Colors Used in Government Procurement, approved February 10, 2017, is incorporated by reference into this section with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. This material is available for inspection at the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Contact CPSC at: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone (301) 504-7479, email *cpsc-os@cpsc.gov .* For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit *www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* or email *fr.inspection@nara.gov .* A read-only copy of the standard is available for viewing on the SAE website at *https://www.sae.org/standards/reading-room .* You may obtain a copy from SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Dr., Warrendale, PA 15096; telephone (888) 875-3976; *www.sae.org .*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

STEWART C. SMITH,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 505 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 25th day of January, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED and the Application to Seek Permission to Exceed Word Count Limit is

DISMISSED as moot

.
EXHIBIT 32
----------




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


     The following statement is provided by the undersigned with respect
to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be
deemed filed pursuant to any provision of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 or any other securities law:

     Each of the undersigned certifies that the foregoing Report on
Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) and that the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of KAANAPALI LAND, LLC.




    By: /s/ Gary Nickele                By: /s/ Gailen J. Hull
        ---------------------------         ---------------------------
        Gary Nickele                        Gailen J. Hull
        Chief Executive Officer             Chief Financial Officer and
                                            Chief Accounting Officer
**EXHIBIT23.1**

 

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED**

**PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

The Board ofDirectors

SierraWireless, Inc.

 

We consent tothe inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of:

 

·                     our auditors’ report dated February 10, 2010 on the consolidated balance sheets of SierraWireless, Inc. (“the Company”) as at December 31, 2009 and 2008, andthe related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders’ equity, andcash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,2009

 

·                     our Report of Independent Registered PublicAccounting Firm dated February 10, 2010 on the Company’s internal controlover financial reporting as of December 31, 2009

 

each of whichis incorporated by reference in this annual report on Form 40-F of theCompany for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009.

 

 
| /s/ KPMG LLP        |   |
|---------------------|--------|
|                |
| Vancouver,  Canada  |
| March 24, 2010 |

 

----
§ 305.19 Label content for pool heaters. ( a ) *Label content.* ( 1 ) Headlines and texts, as illustrated in the prototype and sample labels in appendix L to this part, are standard for all labels.
( 2 ) Name of manufacturer or private labeler shall, in the case of a corporation, be deemed to be satisfied only by the actual corporate name, which may be preceded or followed by the name of the particular division of the corporation. In the case of an individual, partnership, or association, the name under which the business is conducted shall be used. Inclusion of the name of the manufacturer or private labeler is optional at the discretion of the manufacturer or private labeler.
( 3 ) Model number(s) will be the designation given by the manufacturer or private labeler.
( 4 ) Capacity or size is that determined in accordance with this part.
( 5 ) Thermal efficiencies are as determined in accordance with this part.
( 6 ) Unless otherwise indicated in this paragraph, ranges of comparability for thermal efficiencies are found in the appropriate appendices accompanying this part.
( 7 ) Placement of the labeled product on the scale shall be proportionate to the lowest and highest thermal efficiencies.
( 8 ) Labels must contain the model's energy efficiency rating or thermal efficiency, as applicable, as determined in accordance with this part and as indicated on the sample labels in appendix L to this part.
( 9 ) Labels must contain a statement as illustrated in the prototype labels in appendix L and specified as follows: Efficiency range based only on models fueled by [natural gas or oil]. For more information, visit *www.ftc.gov/energy .*
( 10 ) The following statement shall appear on each label as illustrated in the prototype and sample labels in appendix L to this part: Federal law prohibits removal of this label before consumer purchase.
( b ) *Additional information.* No marks or information other than that specified in this part shall appear on or directly adjoining this label except that: ( 1 ) A part or publication number identification may be included on this label, as desired by the manufacturer. If a manufacturer elects to use a part or publication number, it must appear in the lower right-hand corner of the label and be set in 12-point type or smaller.
( 2 ) The energy use disclosure labels required by the governments of Canada or Mexico may appear directly adjoining this label, as desired by the manufacturer.
( 3 ) The manufacturer or private labeler may include the ENERGY STAR logo on the bottom right corner of the label for certified products. The logo must be 1 inch by 1 inch in size. Only manufacturers that have signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Energy or the Environmental Protection Agency may add the ENERGY STAR logo to labels on certified covered products; such manufacturers may add the ENERGY STAR logo to labels only on those covered products that are contemplated by the Memorandum of Understanding.
[84 FR 58036, Oct. 30, 2019]