alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 228 (Monday, November 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 73074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29838]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-2064-000]


Duke Energy Hanging Rock II, LLC; Supplemental Notice That 
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 
204 Authorization

November 18, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding, 
of Duke Energy Hanging Rock II, LLC's application for market-based rate 
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such 
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR 
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability is December 7, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with 
any FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#662023342529080a0f080335131616091412260003140548010910"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="edaba8bfaea28381848388be989d9d829f99ad8b889f8ec38a829b">[email protected]</span></a> or 
call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-29838 Filed 11-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 3570.70 Other considerations. Each application must contain the comments, necessary certifications, and recommendations of appropriate Federal or State regulatory or other agency or institution having expertise in the planning, operation, and management of similar facilities as required by 7 CFR parts 1942, subparts A and C, and 3575, subpart A. Proposals for facilities financed in whole or in part with Agency funds will be coordinated with appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies as required by the following: ( a ) Grants under this subpart are subject to the provisions of 7 CFR 1942.17(k) which include title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Americans with Disability Act of 1990, and the regulations issued thereto. Certain housing-related projects, such as nursing homes, group homes, or assisted-living facilities, must comply with the requirements of the Fair Housing Act.
( b ) Governmentwide debarment and suspension (nonprocurement) and requirements for drug-free workplace are applicable to CFG grants and grantees. See 2 CFR part 180, as implemented by USDA through 2 CFR part 417, and RD Instruction 1940-M for further guidance.
( c ) Restrictions on lobbying. Grantees must comply with the lobbying restrictions set forth in 2 CFR part 418 subpart A.
( d ) Civil Rights Impact Analysis, RD Instruction 2006-P (available in any Rural Development office), and “Civil Rights Impact Analysis Certification.”
[62 FR 16469, Apr. 7, 1997, as amended at 79 FR 76013, Dec. 19, 2014]
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

.



# United States **Court of Appeals** 

**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

TRACEY M. COLE,

Petitioner

v.

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT,

Respondent

______________________

2023

- 1203

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection

Board in No. DA

- 0845

- 22

- 0108

- I

- 1.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the court’s February 1, 2023, order and the court not having received a motion for an extension of time,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

(1) Tracey M. Cole’s motion to dismiss her petition,

ECF No. 4, is granted. Case: 23-1203 Document: 6 Page: 1 Filed: 03/08/2023COLE v. OPM 2

(2) The petition for review i s dismissed.

(3) Each side to bear its own costs.

March 8 , 2023

Date F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: March 8, 2023 Case: 23-1203 Document: 6 Page: 2 Filed: 03/08/2023
EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 12
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 12
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 12
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 12
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 12
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 12
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 10 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 11 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 12 of 12
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. Case Nos. 1:20-cr-7-AW-MAL

1:24-cv-133-AW-MAL

JAMIE LYNWOOD MURRAY,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Jamie Murray received a 360-month guidelines sentence after he pleaded 

guilty to drug and firearm offenses. Years later, he sought § 2255 relief based on 

United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019), which issued before he was indicted. 

The magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation concluding the court 

should dismiss the § 2255 motion as untimely. ECF No. 172. Murray filed a notice 

of appeal, and an Eleventh Circuit appeal has been docketed.1 Murray did not file 

any objections to the report and recommendation. 

Having carefully considered the matter, I now adopt the report and 

recommendation and incorporate it into this order. Murray’s § 2255 motion was 

1 The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation was not a final order 

subject to appeal. But Murray’s premature appeal does not deprive this court of 

jurisdiction to enter final judgment. Even a proper interlocutory appeal over which 

the appeals court does have jurisdiction does not deprive a district court of 

jurisdiction to enter final judgment. See Burton v. Georgia, 953 F.2d 1266, 1272 n.9 

(11th Cir. 1992); Birmingham Fire Fighters Ass’n 117 v. City of Birmingham, 603 

F.3d 1248, 1254 (11th Cir. 2010).

Case 1:20-cr-00007-AW-MAL Document 179 Filed 09/23/24 Page 1 of 2
2

indeed untimely and is subject to dismissal. The clerk will enter a judgment that 

says, “The § 2255 motion is dismissed as untimely.” A certificate of appealability is 

denied. The clerk will close the file.

SO ORDERED on September 23, 2024. 

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cr-00007-AW-MAL Document 179 Filed 09/23/24 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO. 4:98cr79-RH

HARRY ADRIAN ULMER, III, DOCKET NO. 4:06mj25-WCS

Defendant.

 / 

AMENDED ORDER

The Defendant appeared before the undersigned on a first appearance today

to answer to the charges of violating his supervised release. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Defendant shall appear before Chief

Judge Hinkle on March 31, 2006, beginning at 9:00 A.M., for a revocation hearing. 

Until that appearance, Defendant will remain subject to the conditions of supervised

release. 

DONE AND ORDERED on March 9, 2006.

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 4:98-cr-00079-RH Document 105 Filed 03/09/06 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2520 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2520

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prohibit 501(c)(4) 
   entities from participating in, or intervening in (including the 
   publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 26, 2013

Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico (for herself and Mr. Cummings) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prohibit 501(c)(4) 
   entities from participating in, or intervening in (including the 
   publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``501(c)(4) Reform Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. 501(C)(4) ENTITIES PROHIBITED FROM PARTICIPATING IN, OR 
              INTERVENING IN (INCLUDING THE PUBLISHING OR DISTRIBUTING 
              OF STATEMENTS), POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 501(c)(4) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting before the period 
at the end the following: ``and which does not participate in, or 
intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), 
any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate 
for public office.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

ANDREW B. JONES,

DOC # 191172,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 1:20-cv-87-AW-GRJ

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

______________________/

ORDER

Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge’s June 9, 2020, Report and 

Recommendation. ECF No. 3. No objections have been filed. I have now determined 

that the recommendation of dismissal should be accepted. The clerk will enter a 

judgment that says, “This case is DISMISSED for failure to comply with a court 

order and failure to prosecute.” The clerk must then close the file.

SO ORDERED on July 9, 2020.

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-00087-AW-GRJ Document 4 Filed 07/10/20 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM PICTURETEL'S
BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 29, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-Q FILING.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          38,913
<SECURITIES>                                    43,546
<RECEIVABLES>                                  109,118
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (7,573)
<INVENTORY>                                     43,074
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               251,572
<PP&E>                                         154,085
<DEPRECIATION>                                (85,664)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 349,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          101,898
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           382
<OTHER-SE>                                     225,377
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   225,759
<SALES>                                        101,045
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               101,045
<CGS>                                           55,158
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   55,158
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 586
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,049)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (884)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,165)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,165)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        

</TABLE>
Page 1 of 1

1

See Edwards v. United States, 114 F.3d 1083 (11TH Cir. 1997) (district courts must treat notices of

appeal in Section 2255 actions as applications for certificates of appealability).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. 3:94cr03136/RV

BENNIE CLEVELAND WILLIAMS

ORDER

The defendant has filed a notice of appeal (doc. 311) which this court construes as

a request for a certificate of appealability.1

 Defendant appeals the court’s denial of his

Rule 60(b) motion. (Doc. 309). Unless a certificate of appealability is issued, the defendant

may not take an appeal from the final order denying a Rule 60(b) motion. Gonzalez v.

Secretary of Department of Corrections, 317 F.3d 1308, 1312 (11th Cir. 2003). A certificate

of appealability should not issue in the appeal from the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion in a

habeas case unless the petitioner/defendant shows, at a minimum, that it is debatable

among jurists of reason whether the district court abused its discretion, see Mobley v.

Head, 306 F.3d 1096, 1097 (11th Cir. 2002) (“This Court reviews a denial of a 60(b) motion

for an abuse of discretion.”). Because the court finds the defendant has not made the

requisite showing, his request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED. Defendant has

not filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The court finds that the appeal

is not taken in good faith and he is not otherwise entitled to so proceed. Fed.R.App.P.

24(a)(3). Therefore, defendant shall pay the $455.00 filing fee within thirty days.

DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of December, 2006.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:94-cr-03136-RV-CJK Document 314 Filed 12/15/06 Page 1 of 1
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2594 

To provide that a former Member of Congress receiving compensation as 

a highly-paid lobbyist shall be ineligible to concurrently receive Federal 

retirement benefits. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 28, 2013 

Mr. ISRAEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight 

and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by 

the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To provide that a former Member of Congress receiving 

compensation as a highly-paid lobbyist shall be ineligible 

to concurrently receive Federal retirement benefits. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Revolving Door Pen5 sion Prevention Act’’. 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2594 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON TAXPAYER-FUNDED PENSIONS 

2 FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO BECOME 

3 HIGHLY-PAID LOBBYISTS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Any former Member of Congress 

5 who is registered as a lobbyist, and whose annual income 

6 from lobbying activities exceeds $1,000,000, shall not be 

7 eligible to receive benefits under either the Civil Service 

8 Retirement System or the Federal Employees Retirement 

9 System for the period of time during which such former 

10 Member is employed as such a lobbyist and receiving from 

11 lobbying activities an annual income that exceeds 

12 $1,000,000. 

13 (b) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the 

14 term ‘‘former Member of Congress’’ means an individual 

15 who becomes a former Member of Congress after the date 

16 of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (a) | such                Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 fully complies with                the                requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,                as                amended; and |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (b) | the                information contained in such Form 10-Q for the period ended June                30, 2007                fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial                condition and results of operations of James River Group, Inc. and                its                subsidiaries as of, and for, the periods presented in such Form                10-Q. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/                J. Adam Abram                     |   | Date:                August 6, 2007 |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------|
|   | J.                Adam Abram                         |   |                                |
|   | President                and Chief Executive Officer |   |                                |

----
EXHIBIT 31.2

SHANGHAI CENTURY ACQUISITION CORPORATION

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Anthony Kai Yiu Lo, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Shanghai Century Acquisition
Corporation;

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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included 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 periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
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 such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the
effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on
such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



/s/ Anthony Kai Yiu LoAnthony Kai Yiu LoPrincipal financial officerMay 14, 2007




23
<PAGE>

Report of Independent Accountants
UNITED ASSET MANAGEMENT CORPORATION To the
Board of Directors and Stockholders of United Asset Management Corporation
 
    In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and the related
consolidated statements of income, of cash flows and of changes in stockholders'
equity present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of
United Asset Management Corporation and its subsidiaries at December
31, 1996 and 1995, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1996, in conformity
with generally accepted accounting principles. These financial statements are
the responsibility of the Company's management; our responsibility is to express
an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our
audits of these statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards which require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for the opinion expressed above.


/s/ Price Waterhouse LLP
------------------------

Price Waterhouse LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
 
February 10, 1997
#### § 4274.304 Exception authority.

The Administrator may, on a case-by-case basis, grant an exception to any requirement or provision of this subpart provided that such an exception is in the best financial interests of the Federal government. Exercise of this authority cannot be in conflict with applicable law.