alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 230 (Wednesday, December 1, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 74711]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30252]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. ER11-2166-000]


Planet Energy (USA) Corp.; Supplemental Notice That Initial 
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 
Authorization

November 24, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding, 
of Planet Energy (USA) Corp.'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 14, 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#4a0c0f180905242623242f193f3a3a25383e0a2c2f3829642d253c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aceae9feefe3c2c0c5c2c9ffd9dcdcc3ded8eccac9decf82cbc3da">[email protected]</span></a>. or 
call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-30252 Filed 11-30-10; 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>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6726
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CHUKS EVARISTUS NWANERI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CR-91-305-HAR, CA-96-3051-JFM) Submitted: October 7, 1997 Decided: October 28, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Chuks Evaristus Nwaneri, Appellant Pro Se. Jan Paul Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Appellant's motions for appointment of counsel and a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Nwaneri , Nos. CR-91-305-HAR; CA-96-3051-JFM (D. Md. Apr. 29, 1997). 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.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         132,824
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  105,460
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     84,036
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               255,310
<PP&E>                                       2,356,843
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,331,468
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,330,301
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          635,224
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        19,085
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,330,301
<SALES>                                         32,021
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               371,142
<CGS>                                          249,081
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  249,081
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,504
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (183,948)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 3:20cr45-MCR

IRA D. ALSTON

_____________________________/

ACCEPTANCE OF PLEA OF GUILTY

Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate 

Judge, to which there have been no timely objections, the plea of guilty of the 

Defendant, IRA D. ALSTON, to Counts One and Two of the indictment is hereby 

ACCEPTED. All parties shall appear before this Court for sentencing as directed.

DONE and ORDERED this 1st of July 2021.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

DAVID LEON LASHLEY,

Petitioner,

v. Case No.: 1:20cv248-MW/HTC

SECRETARY, FLORIDA

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

_________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate Judge's Report and 

Recommendation, ECF No. 24, and has also reviewed de novo Petitioner’s

objections, ECF No. 25.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation, ECF No. 24, is accepted and adopted, over 

the Petitioner’s objections, as this Court’s opinion. The Clerk shall enter judgment 

stating, “The petition for writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1, challenging the judgment 

of conviction in State v. Lashley, 2012-CF-874, in the Eighth Judicial Circuit, in and 

for Alachua County, Florida, is DENIED without an evidentiary hearing.”

Case 1:20-cv-00248-MW-HTC Document 26 Filed 02/07/23 Page 1 of 2
2

A certificate of appealability is DENIED. The Clerk shall close the file. 

SO ORDERED on February 7, 2023.

s/Mark E. Walker ____

Chief United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-00248-MW-HTC Document 26 Filed 02/07/23 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          13,650
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   65,882
<ALLOWANCES>                                    33,688
<INVENTORY>                                      8,836
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                93,049
<PP&E>                                         341,043
<DEPRECIATION>                                 118,320
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 429,327
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          406,619
<BONDS>                                          3,634
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       216,045
<OTHER-SE>                                    (219,351)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   429,327
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                95,084
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   40,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                46,919
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 6,958
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,010
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (8,503)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (8,503)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (8,503)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.15)



</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-19-00026-CV

STUDIO E ARCHITECTURE AND INTERIORS, INC.,

Appellant

v.

Emily LEHMBERG,

Appellee

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016-CI-10649

Honorable Cathleen M. Stryker, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE WATKINS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order is REVERSED 

and this cause is REMANDED to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this 

opinion. Costs of appeal are taxed against appellee. 

SIGNED April 17, 2019.

_____________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
Subpart 31.3 - Contracts with Educational

Institutions

Parent topic: Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures

31.301 Purpose.

This subpart provides the principles for determining the cost of research and development, training,

and other work performed by educational institutions under contracts with the Government.

31.302 General.

The OMB Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR part 200, subpart E and appendix III, provides principles for

determining the costs applicable to research and development, training, and other work performed

by educational institutions (defined as institutions of higher education in the OMB Uniform Guidance

at 2 CFR part 200, subpart A, and 20 U.S.C. 1001) under contracts with the Government.

31.303 Requirements.

(a) Contracts that refer to this subpart 31.3 for determining allowable costs under contracts with

educational institutions (defined as institutions of higher education in the OMB Uniform Guidance at

2 CFR part 200, subpart A, and 20 U.S.C. 1001) shall be deemed to refer to, and shall have the

allowability of costs determined by the contracting officer in accordance with, the OMB Uniform

Guidance at 2 CFR part 200, subpart E and appendix III, in effect on the date of the contract.

(b) Agencies are not expected to place additional restrictions on individual items of cost.
**CERTIFICATE
        OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
 **PURSUANT
        TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED**
 **PURSUANT
        TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 This
        Certificate is being delivered pursuant to the requirements of Section 1350
        of
        Chapter 63 (Mail Fraud) of Title 18 (Crimes and Criminal Procedures) of the
        United States Code and shall not be relied on by any person for any other
        purpose.
 
 The
        undersigned, who is the Chief Financial Officer of Orion HealthCorp, Inc.
        (the
“small business issuer”), hereby certifies as follows:
 
 The
        Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the small business issuer (the “Report”),
        which accompanies this Certificate, fully complies with the requirements
        of
        Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and all
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the small business issuer.
 
 Dated
        this 12 th day of
        August, 2005.
 
 
 /s/
        Stephen H. Murdock
 _____________________________________________Stephen
                  H. Murdock, Chief Financial Officer(Principal
                  Accounting Officer)
 
 
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
        Act of 2002 has been provided to the small business issuer and will be retained
        by the small business issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
        Commission or its staff upon request.
AFS-10-384-E 13 Sep 2010

Exemption No. 9785A Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2001-10583

Mr. Jim Stephenson

CEO/President Aero Sports Connection

231 SW Bonanza Glen Lake City, FL 32025

Dear Mr. Stephenson:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 9785. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated August 25, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Aero Sports Connection (ASC) fo r an extension of Exemption No. 9785. That exemption from § 103.1(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allowed ASC to operate unpowered ultralight vehicles with another occupant for the purpose of sport and

recreation.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to ASC.

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 9785 remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the2

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. This exemption is limited to § 103.1(a) only.

2. Each operation must comply with all other sections of part 103.

3. All flights operating under this exemption must be for training purposes only. Thisexemption applies only to flights for the purpose of giving instruction in footlaunched, two-place powered and unpowered paragliders or hang gliders.

4. Prior to all two-occupant training flights, th e student must be informed that the flightis conducted under an exemption granted by the FAA and that the foot-launched, twoplace powered and unpowered paraglider or hang glider does not meet aircraft certification standards set forth by the FAA.

5. For identification purposes, ASC shall issue an individual authorization to each person allowed to conduct operations under this exemption. Each authorization shall include an identification number and a copy of this exemption. ASC shall also have a procedure to rescind this authority when needed.

6. Each individual who operates a foot-launched, two-place powered and unpowered paraglider or hang glider under the authority of this exemption must be familiar with the provisions contained herein and must have in his or her personal possession a copy of the authorization issued by ASC and a copy of this exemption. These documents shall be presented for inspection upon request by the FAA.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 9785 to November 30, 2012, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John W. McGraw Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1989
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1989
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,178
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,178
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,215
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      423
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    62
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (488)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,671,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,107,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   402,000
<INVENTORY>                                 22,047,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            32,037,000
<PP&E>                                      18,925,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              14,084,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              40,048,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,889,000
<BONDS>                                      2,580,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,482,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  18,585,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                40,048,000
<SALES>                                     15,039,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,039,000
<CGS>                                        9,481,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,353,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (14,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             229,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,471,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   575,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            896,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   896,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-26-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-27-1996
<CASH>                                         217,682
<SECURITIES>                                 1,030,242
<RECEIVABLES>                                  518,027
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (64,833)
<INVENTORY>                                     25,469
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,904,810
<PP&E>                                         691,569
<DEPRECIATION>                               (312,414)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,355,264
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          443,899
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                        36,552
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,857,910
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,355,264
<SALES>                                        437,919
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               437,919
<CGS>                                           96,011
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   96,011
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               259,078
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 95,580
<INCOME-TAX>                                    32,019
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             63,561
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    63,561
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
        









































</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2  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 Geopulse Exploration, Inc., (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2011 (the "Report"), I, Massimiliano Farneti,  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/Massimiliano Farneti Massimiliano Farneti, Chief Financial Officer  March 9, 2011