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

[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 232 (Friday, December 3, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 70276]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26647]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-4966-N-01]

The Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of appointment.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Housing and Urban Development announces the 
appointment of Deputy Secretary Roy A. Bernardi as Chairperson of the 
Performance Review Board. The address is: Department of Housing and 
Urban Development, Washington, DC 20410-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Persons desiring any further 
information about the Performance Review Board and its members may 
contact Earnestine Pruitt, Director, Executive Personnel Management 
Division, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC 
20410-3000, telephone (202) 708-1381 (this is not a toll-free number).

    Dated: November 12, 2004.
Alphonso Jackson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-26647 Filed 12-2-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-32-P
```
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Tabatha I, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the
period ending June 30, 2003 (the "Report"), I, John Ballard, President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

> 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange
> Act of 1934; and
> 
> 
> 2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the Company's
> financial position and results of operations.

/s/John Ballard



 John Ballard,

 President and Chief Financial Officer

May 11, 2004
§ 2004.33 Factors the General Counsel may consider. The General Counsel may grant an employee permission to testify regarding USTR matters and to produce records and information in response to a demand or request. Among the relevant factors the General Counsel may consider in making this determination are whether: ( a ) The requested records, information or testimony are reasonable in scope, relevant and material to the pending action, and unavailable from other sources such as a non-USTR employee, or a USTR employee other than the employee named.
( b ) Production of the records, information or testimony might result in USTR appearing to favor one litigant over another.
( c ) USTR has an interest in the decision that may be rendered in the legal proceeding.
( d ) Approving the demand or request would assist or hinder USTR in performing statutory duties or unduly burden USTR resources.
( e ) The demand or request is unduly burdensome or otherwise inappropriate under the rules of discovery or procedure governing the case or matter in which the demand or request arose.
( f ) Production of the records, information or testimony might violate or be inconsistent with a statute, Executive Order, regulation or other legal authority.
( g ) Disclosure, including release in camera, is appropriate or necessary under the relevant substantive law concerning privilege.
( h ) Disclosure, except when in camera and necessary to assert a claim of privilege, would reveal information properly classified or other matters exempt from unrestricted disclosure.
( i ) Disclosure would interfere with ongoing enforcement proceedings, compromise constitutional rights, reveal the identity of an intelligence source or confidential informant, or disclose trade secrets or similarly confidential commercial or financial information.
( j ) Any other appropriate factor.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Yao Afolabi, Appellant.

[820 NYS2d 852]

*862Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Katz, J.), rendered July 1, 2004, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, reckless endangerment in the first degree (four counts), assault in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Any error in the court’s failure to grant the defendant’s request for a missing witness charge was rendered harmless by the overwhelming proof of guilt, which included the identification testimony of the two witnesses and a direct connection between the defendant and the weapon used to commit the crimes *(see People v Morales,*288 AD2d 328, 329 [2001]). Adams, J.P., Krausman, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.
1997 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

8-15-1997

In Re: Dorsainvil

Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 96-8074

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1997

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1997 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"In Re: Dorsainvil" (1997). 1997 Decisions. Paper 193.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1997/193
iled August 15, 1997 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

No. 96-8074 

IN RE: OCSULIS DORSAINVIL, 

Petitioner

On Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Middle District of Pennsylvania 

Before: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, 

STAPLETON and COWEN, Circuit Judges

ORDER AMENDING OPINION 
 IS ORDERED that the slip opinion in the above case, 

filed July 23, 1997, be amended by the addition of the 

following footnote referenced by an asterisk after the word 

"court." on page 2, line 8 from the bottom: 

*. The court expresses its appreciation to counsel for 

the petitioner for serving as volunteers at the request 

of the court to brief and argue this matter, which is in 

the highest tradition of service by members of the 

profession. 

By the Court 

/s/ Dolores K. Sloviter 

Chief Judge 

Dated: August 15, 1997
### SUBCHAPTER II—DEFENSE HOUSING

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

#### Revolving Fund

Establishment of revolving fund under which to account for assets and liabilities in connection with public war housing under sections 1521 to 1524 of this title, see section 1701g–5 of Title 12, Banks and Banking.
Exhibit 31.1CERTIFICATIONI, David G. Powers certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of United Heritage Bankshares ofFlorida, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report; 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)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date:  August 5, 2005  By:  /s/ David G. Powers      David G. Powers,          President and Chief Executive Officer   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Errata Chapter 5:

Section 5.3.2.8 Deposition metric: Developing N and S tradeoff curves from the 

deposition metrics for the acid-sensitive categories

Pg 5-47 line 3-4 It is incorrectly stated that “The deposition metric for a category will be 

a single, specified value for the deposition of N and S“. The deposition metric results 

from the distribution of critical loads based on equation 1. 

CLANC (N S) ([BC]O [ANClim ])Q *

lim + = − (1)

Equation 1 represents that maximum amount of SOx that can be deposited to an 

ecosystem, when N deposition is ≤ Neco, before exceeding its critical load ( max DLSOx ). 

Once the deposition metric is selected, Neco is added to calculate the maximum amount 

of nitrogen that can be deposited to an ecosystem before exceeding its critical load

( max DLN ). Three sets of coordinates define the N + S tradeoff curves: (0, max DLSOx ), (Neco,

max DLSOx ) and ( max DLN ,0).

(0, DL max (s)) (Neco, DL max (S)) 

(DL max (N), 0)

0

50

100

0 50 100

N (meq/m2/yr)

SO2+SO4-2 (meq/m2/yr)

Section 5.3.3.4 Oxidized Sulfur and Nitrogen Pollutant Species

Pg 56 line 17-18 It is incorrectly stated that “CMAQ does not currently provide 

simulations of coarse particulate sulfate and nitrate”. The current version of CMAQ does 

include this process.
#### § 303.35 Use of terms “virgin” or “new.”

The terms *virgin* or *new* as descriptive of a textile fiber product, or any fiber or part thereof, shall not be used when the product, fiber or part so described is not composed wholly of new or virgin fiber which has never been reclaimed from any spun, woven, knitted, felted, bonded, or similarly manufactured product.

[79 FR 18771, Apr. 4, 2014]
### §10851. Construction of subchapters I and II; "individual with mental illness" defined

(a) Subchapters I and II shall not be construed as establishing any new rights for individuals with mental illness.

(b) For purposes of this section, the term "individual with mental illness" has the same meaning as in section 10802(3) 1 of this title.

(Pub. L. 99–319, title III, §301, May 23, 1986, 100 Stat. 489; Pub. L. 102–173, §10, Nov. 27, 1991, 105 Stat. 1219.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 10802(3) of this title, referred to in subsec. (b), was redesignated section 10802(4) of this title by Pub. L. 102–173, §4(1), Nov. 27, 1991, 105 Stat. 1217.

#### Amendments

1991—Pub. L. 102–173, substituted "individuals with mental illness" for "mentally ill individuals" in subsec. (a) and "individual with mental illness" for "mentally ill individual" in subsec. (b).

1 See References in Text note below.
#### Joseph Micale et al., Suing on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Land Owners Similarly Situated Whose Properties Have Been Appropriated by *896Defendants, Appellants, v. Robert L. Rice et al., Constituting the Commissioners of the Niagara Frontier State Park Commission, Respondents.

Present — Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Love, Kimball and Piper, JJ. [See 274 App. Div. 963, 972.]
No. 15-085 December 17, 2015

CONTACT: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200

NRC Seeks Public Comment on Draft Guidance for 

Subsequent Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission seeks public comment on two draft documents designed 

to guide the agency’s staff in reviewing applications to extend operations of commercial nuclear power 

plants beyond 60 years.

The NRC expects to receive the first application for “subsequent license renewal,” or SLR, 

sometime in 2019. The draft guidance documents, once finalized, will describe methods and techniques 

acceptable to the NRC staff in reviewing subsequent license renewal applications. Industry will be able 

to use the documents when preparing their applications. The new documents, Generic Aging Lessons 

Learned for Subsequent License Renewal (GALL-SLR) Report and Standard Review Plan for Review 

of Subsequent License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants (SRP-SLR), are based on 

similar documents covering initial license renewals. They will describe aging management programs 

acceptable to the NRC for operations up to 80 years.

The NRC staff will hold public meetings at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Md., on Jan. 21, 

Jan. 22 and Feb. 23, 2016, to present the guidance, answer questions and receive comments. Written 

comments may be submitted over the federal government’s rulemaking website, www.regulations.gov, 

using Docket ID NRC-2015-0251. The comment period will open upon publication of a Federal 

Register notice, expected Dec. 22. Comments will be accepted through Feb. 29, 2016.

U.S. commercial nuclear power reactors are initially licensed for 40 years of operation, and the 

licenses can be renewed for periods of 20 years. To date, the NRC has renewed the licenses of 81 

reactors to operate for up to 60 years (two of those reactors have since permanently shut down). 

Information about reactor license renewal is available on the NRC’s website.

The draft GALL-SLR Report (NUREG-2191) and draft SRP-SLR (NUREG-2192) are available 

on the NRC’s license renewal guidance webpage.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002**

 

 

**               **In connection with thequarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Little Sioux Corn Processors, L.L.C. (the “Company”)for the three month fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2004, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Stephen Roe, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

 
|   |   |  /s/ Stephen Roe                  |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   |   | Stephen Roe                            |   |
|   |   | President and Chief  Executive Officer |
|   |   | Dated:                                 | February 14, 2005 |
|        |        |                                        |  |  |
#### Henry F. Panay et al., Copartners Doing Business as Panay & Lubliner, Respondents, *v.*Russos Zobanakis, Appellant.

*912
      *Per Curiam.*

The action is to recover damages for breach of a written contract. The plaintiffs are business brokers. On January 23, 1948, the defendant called on the plaintiffs seeking to purchase a restaurant. He signed an agreement that listed the names of several prospects, including the Yalta Restaurant, and received information as to purchase price and volume of business at each location. The agreement provided, *inter alia,*that “ * * * in the event he [defendant] purchases any of the above businesses * * * he will notify the broker herein immediately, and that in the event he fails to do so he will become personally liable for the commission due to the broker.”

Several months later the Yalta Restaurant was offered to the defendant by another broker. It was eventually bought by the defendant, who failed to notify the plaintiffs prior to the closing of the transaction.

In this action the plaintiffs sue to recover the sum of $4,500 as the amount of an alleged agreed commission of 10% on the purchase price of the restaurant pursuant to the agreement aforesaid. The trial court, however, awarded a judgment of $1,500 on a *quantum meruit*basis, although no such cause of action was pleaded.

While we think that such judgment was unwarranted under the pleadings so as to require a new trial in any event, it is our further view that the complaint should have been dismissed for the plaintiffs’ failure to establish any right to recover against the defendant for breach of contract. We interpret the agreement to mean that commissions must have been due to the broker from the seller, before the defendant would be liable to the plaintiffs under the contract in suit. The plaintiffs did not have an exclusive listing of the Yalta Restaurant and made no effort to bring the principals together or consummate the sale. Of course, liability might arise for any fraudulent or wrongful conduct, but no such claim is involved in this ease. Concededly, the ultimate sale was not made through the plaintiffs’ efforts and no commissions had been earned by them. Therefore, the plaintiffs did not suffer any damage within the contemplation of the contract due to the defendant’s failure to notify.

The judgment appealed from should be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed.

Glennon, J. P., Dore, Callahan, Yan Yoorhis and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously reversed, with costs to the appellant, and the complaint dismissed.
### §12804. Rehabilitation loans

#### (a) In general

The Secretary shall make available a model program to provide direct loans to finance the rehabilitation of low and moderate income single family and multifamily residential properties.

#### (b) Condition of loans

The Secretary shall establish terms and conditions to ensure that such loans are acceptable risks, taking into consideration the need for rehabilitation, the security for the loan and the ability of the borrower to repay the loan. The Secretary may establish the interest rate for loans under the model program, which shall include special interest rates for loans to borrowers with incomes below 80 percent of the area median income.

#### (c) Additional restrictions

Guidelines for the model program may require that the property—

(1) be located in an area that contains a substantial number of dwellings in need of rehabilitation;

(2) the property 1 is residential and owner-occupied; and

(3) the property 1 is in need of rehabilitation or concentrated code enforcement within a reasonable time, and the rehabilitation of such property is consistent with a local plan for rehabilitation or code enforcement.

Additional guidelines for the model program shall generally comport with the additional protections and restrictions specified under section 1452b 2 of this title.

(Pub. L. 101–625, title II, §254, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4121.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 1452b of this title, referred to in subsec. (c), was repealed by Pub. L. 101–625, title II, §289(b)(1), Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4128, which is classified to section 12839(b)(1) of this title.

1 So in original. The words "the property" probably should not appear.

2 See References in Text note below.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 30, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69615-69616]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26361]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose

[[Page 69616]]

confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material, and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a 
clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special 
Emphasis Panel Dissertation Research Grants.
    Date: December 10, 2004.
    Time: 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 
Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Aileen Schulte, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute 
of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd, 
Room 6140, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, 301-443-1225, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#543527373c213820311439353d387a3a3d3c7a333b22"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bbdac8d8d3ced7cfdefbd6dad2d795d5d2d395dcd4cd">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.242, 
Mental Health Research Grants; 93.281, Scientist Development Award, 
Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, and Research Scientist 
Award; 93.282, Mental Health National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 22, 2004.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 04-26361 Filed 11-29-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>