alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1260.203 Confidential treatment. All information obtained from such books, records or reports required under the Act and this subpart shall be kept confidential by all persons, including employees and agents and former employees and agents of the Board, all officers and employees and all former officers and employees of the Department, and by all officers and employees and all former officers and employees of contracting organizations having access to such information, and shall not be available to Board members or any other producers or importers. Only those persons having a specific need for such information in order to effectively administer the provisions of this subpart shall have access to this information. In addition, only such information so furnished or acquired as the Secretary deems relevant shall be disclosed by them, and then only in a suit or administrative hearing brought at the direction, or upon the request, of the Secretary, or to which the Secretary or any officer of the United States is a party, and involving this subpart. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit: ( a ) The issuance of general statements based upon the reports of the number of persons subject to this subpart or statistical data collected therefrom, which statements do not identify the information furnished by any person; and
( b ) The publication, by direction of the Secretary, of the name of any person who has been adjudged to have violated this subpart, together with a statement of the particular provisions of the subpart violated by such person.
[51 FR 26138, July 18, 1986; 51 FR 26686, July 25, 1986]
| View photos from the CreatingHealthy Communities Conference 
*compliments of Robert Smith, AuroraWeed and Seed* (Colorado)
BeginView the Selma Weed and Seed MuralProject *photos sent in by MikalKirchner, City of Selma*(California)
BeginSubmitYour Site's Photos- simplyattach your digital photo files and we'll post them here!This document was last update on November 24, 2000 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7732
CHARLES PAUL JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Parkersburg. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CR-88-266, CA-88-266-6-1) Submitted: January 11, 1996 Decided: January 25, 1996 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Paul Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). See generally Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). 2 PER CURIAM:Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. Appellant's case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1988). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Appellant that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district courtorder based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Appellant failed to object to the magistrate judge's recommendation. The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge's recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. * Appellant has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
C. A. No. 80-3.

#### State *v.*David Collins *et al.*

*Dennis J. Roberts II,*Attorney General, *Stephen R. Famiglietti,*Special Assistant Attorney General, for plaintiff, *John L. Cosentino, Gerard McG. DeCelles, Alton W. Wiley,*for defendants.

On motion of counsel, John L. Cosentino is appointed to represent defendant James Foreman and Gerard DeCelles is appointed to represent defendant Darryl Amado in the prosecution of their appeal.
#### § 1710.601 Advance of funds from loans.

The borrower shall request advances of funds as needed. Advances are subject to RUS approval and must be requested in writing on RUS Form 595 or an RUS approved equivalent form. Funds will not be advanced until the Administrator has received satisfactory evidence that the borrower has met all applicable conditions precedent to the advance of funds, including evidence that the supplemental financing required under this part concurrent loan guaranteed by RUS is available to the borrower under terms and conditions satisfactory to RUS.
Order filed December 10, 2019

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 19

- 00665

- CV

____________ KIM D. RICHARDSON , Appellant

V. JOYCE POWELL, Appellee

On Appeal from Co unty Civil C our t at Law No

. 2

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1138053



### O R D E R
Appellant’ s brief was due November 25, 2019

. No brief or motion for
extension of time has been filed

. If appellant does not file a brief with this court on
or before December 27, 2019 , the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Poissant.
EXHIBIT 31.4

CERTIFICATION

I, William J. Davis, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Allscripts Healthcare Solutions, Inc; and
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: April 30, 2012 |  | /s/ William J. Davis   
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer
§ 1753.66 General. ( a ) This subpart implements and explains the provisions of the Loan Documents setting forth the requirements and the procedures to be followed by borrowers in purchasing and installing special equipment financed with loan funds.
( b ) Terms used in this subpart are defined in § 1753.2 and Equipment Contract, RUS Contract Form 395 (RUS Contract Form 395).
( c ) Borrowers must obtain RUS review and approval of the LD for their telephone systems. Applications of equipment not included in an approved LD must conform to the modernization plan as required by 7 CFR part 1751, subpart B, and must be submitted to RUS for review and approval.
( d ) RUS Contract Form 395 and applicable specifications shall be used for the purchase of special equipment for major construction on a furnish-and-install basis, as well as on a furnish-only basis.
( e ) The procedures provided in subpart I, if applicable, or a FAP approved by RUS may be used for the installation of special equipment purchased with a RUS Contract Form 395 contract not including installation.
( f ) For special equipment purchases for minor construction, the borrower may at its option use the Methods of Minor Construction procedures contained in subpart I or the purchase procedures contained in this subpart H.
( g ) Some types of special equipment contain software. RUS Contract Form 395 indicates whether the equipment contains software and whether the software contract stipulations are applicable.
[81 FR 71584, Oct. 18, 2016]
Exhibit 31.1

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer

I , Phyllis Maxwell, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on FORM 10K-SB of Clixtix, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

      a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

      b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

      a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

      b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls
or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent
to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


/s/ "Phyllis Maxwell"

Phyllis Maxwell, President              Date: March 30, 2004
Editorial Note on Subchapter B of Chapter XIV
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations to regulations affecting previous program years not included in this volume, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*

§ 1412.33 Updating PLC yield for seed cotton. ( a ) For a farm that has seed cotton base acres as adjusted, in excess of zero acres, an owner of the farm has a one-time opportunity in a specified period, as announced by FSA, to update the PLC yield equal to 90 percent of the seed cotton's 2013 through 2017 average yield per planted acre, excluding from the average any year that no acreage was planted to upland cotton, times 2.4. If the yield per planted acre in any of the years 2013 through 2017 is less than 75 percent of the average of the county yield, then 75 percent of the average of the 2013 through 2017 county yields will be substituted for that year, excluding from the average any year when no acreage was planted to the covered commodity, multiplied by the ratio obtained by dividing: ( 1 ) The average of the 2008 through 2012 national average yield per planted acre for the covered commodity; by
( 2 ) The average of the 2013 through 2017 national average yield per planted acre for the covered commodity.
( b ) The owner of the farm may retain the PLC yield or update the PLC yield.
( c ) PLC yields are exclusively used for PLC. However, any owner of a farm can update the seed cotton PLC yield as specified in paragraph (a) of this section, regardless of program election, enrollment, or participation.
( d ) A decision by any owner of a farm to update the seed cotton PLC yield as specified in this section is final and binding unless that decision to update the yield is withdrawn by that owner or a different yield update is made by that owner or another owner. If that owner or another owner requests a different PLC yield update for the covered commodity during the yield update period specified in paragraph (a) of this section, that update will become final.
( e ) All PLC yield updates are subject to review and approval by FSA as specified in § 1412.36. FSA's decision to issue payments based on the PLC yield updated by an owner is subject to verification and spot check by FSA at any time.
( f ) Yield updates in this section will be permitted using the owner's certification of yield. The certification is subject to spot check or verification by FSA at any time. If selected for spot check or verification, the owner must submit evidence specified in § 1412.35 to support the certified yield.
[83 FR 40658, Aug. 16, 2018, as amended at 84 FR 45890, Sept. 3, 2019]
30 SouthWacker Drive, Suite 2600, Chicago, Illinois 60606 ,... t:3124449300 £:3124449027 chuhak.com**~**
Carri A. Conlon 

# R\E'CEIVED**CHUHAK&TECSO~~** Writer's Direct Line (312) 855-4617 Writer's Email cconlon@chuhak.com 

## AUG 27 2012 

## HEARING DOCKET

August 22, 2012 attorneysatlaw

Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430 Federal Aviation Administration (Wilbur Wright Bldg. -Room 2W1000) 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS, AND CERTIFIED U.S. MAIL- RETURN RECEIPT

RE: Inthe Matter ofLeading Edge Aviation, Inc. FAA Case No. 2011NM070089 Our File No. 22816-49252 To Whom ItMay Concern: Enclosed please find an original and one copy of an Entry ofAppearance for Fred C. Begy, III and Carri A. Conlon in the above referenced proceeding. Also please find an original and one copy ofthe Respondent's Answer to the Complaint. FAA counsel provided dates that he is unavailable for the hearing m the correspondence accompanying the FAA's Complaint. Counsel for the respondent are unavailable for the hearing on the following dates: September 3- 14, 2012; October 9-12, 2012; October 24-November 6, 2012; November 19-28, 2012; December 17, 2012-January 4, 2013; January 25-February 6, 2013; and March 1-8,2012.

CAC/dg Encls. Very truly yours,

Carri A. Conlon

cc: Jeffrey Harper, FAA Attorney Dana Stephenson, FAA Attorney

1865235\1\22816\49252UNITED STATES OFAMERICA DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION OFFICE OFHEARINGS

WASHINGTON,D.C. 

# RECEIVED AUG 2 72012 HEARING DOCKET

IntheMatter of FAADocketNo.: NotAssigned LEADINGEDGE AVIATION, INC., FAA CaseNo.: 2011NM070089 Respondent. Judge Not Assigned

JUDGE NOT ASSIGNED: ENTRY OFAPPEARANCE Pursuant to 14 C.P.R. § 13.204(b), the undersigned hereby enter their Appearances as representatives ofthe Respondentinthe above-captioned case:
Fred C. Begy, III Chuhak & Tecson, P.C. 30 S. Wacker Drive, Ste. 2600 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: 312-855-5442 Fax: 312-368-9422

1865179\1\22816\49252 Carri A. Conlon Chuhak & Tecson, P.C. 30 S. Wacker Drive, Ste. 2600 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: 312-855-4617 Fax: 312-444-9027CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

### The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath, certifies that a true and correct copy ofthis Entry ofAppearance was served upon counsel-of-record as indicated above by depositing same, proper postage prepaid, in the U.S. mailbox located at 30 South Wacker Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60606 at or about 5:00p.m. this 22"d day ofAugust, 2012 and al,so sending via Federal Express onthis 22"d day ofAugust, 2012. Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington, D.C. 20591 Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000 Jeffrey M. Harper, FAAAttorney Dana Stephenson, FAA Attorney FAA Office ofRegional Counsel FederalAviationAdministration Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 1601 Lind Ave. SW Renton, WA 98057

Counsel for Respondent

Subscribed and swornbefo e me on this 22"d day ofAugust, 2012.

My commission expires:

1865179\1\22816\49252 OFFICIAL SEAL DENISE GORE Notary Public • State of Illinois My Commission.Expires Nov 12,2013

-2-
§ 15f.5 How do I request that USDA consider my complaint under these procedures? In order for USDA to consider your complaint under these procedures, a Section 741 Complaint Request must be docketed with the Docketing Clerk in the USDA OCR. ( a ) *Do I have to file a “Section 741 Complaint Request” if USDA is already working on my complaint? Do I have to file again?* If USDA OCR already reviewed or is working on your complaint, you will receive a notice by March 1, 1999, indicating that your complaint automatically has been docketed as a Section 741 Complaint Request for consideration under these procedures. The notice will provide you with the docket number assigned your Request and will give you further instructions with respect to what options you have or what actions you must take.
( b ) *What if USDA is not working on my complaint? If I think USDA has reviewed or is working on my complaint, but do not receive a letter by March 1, 1999, what should I do?* If USDA is not already working on your complaint, or you do not receive a letter from USDA by March 1, 1999, or within 30 days thereafter, you should file a Section 741 Complaint Request with the Docketing Clerk at USDA OCR.
( c ) *How long do I have to file my Section 741 Complaint Request?* You have until October 21, 2000 to file your Section 741 Complaint Request. If you did not receive a notice form USDA by October 21, 2000, that your Section 741 Complaint Request had been docketed automatically under paragraph (a) of this section, and you did not file a Section 741 Complaint Request prior to October 21, 2000, under paragraph (b) of this section, then any Section 741 Complaint Request received by USDA after October 21, 2000, will not be accepted.
[63 FR 67394, Dec. 4, 1998, as amended at 68 FR 7412, Feb. 14, 2003]
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Tennessee Commerce Bancorp, Inc. (the “Registrant”) onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)    The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)    The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Registrant.

 
| Date: November 06,  2009 | By:                                   | /s/ Arthur F. Helf |
|-------------------------------|---------------------------------------|--------------------|
|                          | Arthur F. Helf                        |
|                          | Chairman and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-13-00472- CV

R. F ., Appellan t
v. Texas Depart m ent of Fam ily and P rote ctive Service s, Appellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 126 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -F M- 11- 0040 62, H ONO RAB LE LO RA J. LI VINGSTO N, JUDGE P RESIDING
O R D E R
P ER CURIAM

Appellant R.F.’s motion to supplement the cler k’s reco rd i s grante d in part. It is order ed that the rec ord be supplemented with (1) the instruction sheet g iven to counsel for the parties befor e voir dire in this case that notified them of the terms under which they could rec eive the jury information packe t and (2) the entire unreda cted jury information packe t for the jury pool in this
case . The re mainder of

R.F.’s motion to supplement the rec ord is denied. R.F.’s mot ion for ex tension of t ime to file her bri ef is grante d in part. Counsel for R.F. is order ed to file her brief no later than the 10th day afte r the rec ord has been supplemented as order ed here in. I f the brief is not filed by that date, counsel may be require d to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of cour t. It is so ordered on Septe mber 27, 2013. Be fore Chief Justice Jones, J ustices Pemberton a nd Field