alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1



THE LOEWEN GROUP INC.

(NYSE, TSE, ME: LWN)                               NEWS


Investor contacts:                                 Media Contact:
Chris Hunter, Director, Investor Relations         Dave Laundy, Vice President
The Loewen Group Inc.                              Corp. Communications
Tel: (800) 347-7010                                Tel: (604) 293-7857


                              FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


                         LOEWEN GROUP ANNOUNCES PLANNED

                     US $400 MILLION DEBT PRIVATE PLACEMENT


VANCOUVER, BC, May 15, 1998 -- The Loewen Group Inc. announced today that Loewen
Group International, Inc. plans to privately place with a group of underwriters
approximately US$400 million in senior guaranteed notes. The senior notes will
be guaranteed by The Loewen Group Inc., and will be offered to qualified
institutional buyers and institutional accredited investors in the United States
and Canada.

The senior notes initially will be secured and will rank equally in right of
payment with other senior indebtedness of The Loewen Group Inc. and Loewen Group
International Inc. Net proceeds from the private placement will be used to repay
existing indebtedness.

The senior notes will not be registered under the United States Securities Act
of 1933, as amended, and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent
registration under federal and applicable state securities laws or an available
exemption from such registration requirements.

The Loewen Group is North America's second largest and fastest growing funeral
home and cemetery operator in terms of revenues and assets. The company owns or
operates more than 1,100 funeral and 500 cemeteries in the United States,
Canada, and the United Kingdom. Over 90% of the company's revenue is derived
from the United States.


The Loewen Group's website is located at http://www.loewengroup.com

                                     - 30 -
<PAGE>   1

                                  EXHIBIT 24.1

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY
                                 THOMAS W. FIFE


       KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned, Thomas W. Fife,
hereby constitutes and appoints Gordon A. Gardiner or Mark D. Brown his true and
lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, for him and his name, place and stead, in any
and all capacities, to sign the Form 10-KSB of Data Dimensions, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1997, and any amendments or
supplements thereto, and to file this Power of Attorney and the Form 10-KSB,
with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and the NASDAQ National Market System,
granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do and
perform each requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as
fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby
ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agent, may do or
cause to be done by virtue hereof.

        Dated this 18th day of March, 1998.

Signature:


/s/ THOMAS W. FIFE
--------------------------------------
Thomas W. Fife
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-11118

(Summary Calendar)

MARVIN LEE BELL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; KATHLENE M. HAWK,

Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons;

GEORGE E. KILLINGER, Warden, FCI Fort Worth;

EZAZ, M.D.; D. HASS, Associate Warden;

ANNETTE CURRIER, Infections Disease Control Officer;

WHITLOCK, H.C.U. (Case Manager) FMC; KING, Long

Term Nurse and Assistant; BETTS, Long Term Nurse

and Assistant,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(USDC No. 4:93-CV-608-A)

April 10, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Marvin Lee Bell, a federal prisoner formerly housed at FCI Fort Worth, appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his complaint brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403

U.S. 388 (1971). Bell argued that the conditions of his confinement while he was housed in a special

medical-care unit for 237 days violated the Eighth Amendment.

The district court dismissed the complaint based on bell’s failure to meet the heightened
2

pleading requirement, and on 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Bell’s pleadings failed to allege the requisite

deliberate indifference required to establish an Eighth Amendment violation. See Farmer v. Brennan,

114 S. Ct. 1970, 1984 (1994). Accordingly, the district court’s dismissal under § 1915(d) was not

an abuse of discretion. See Macias v. Raul A. (Unknown), Badge No.153, 23 F.3d 94, 97 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 220 (1994).

APPEAL DISMISSED.
§ 182.8159 Biotin. ( a ) *Product.* Biotin.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing practice.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-18-00501-CR

BOBBY LYNN RACHAL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from 

Criminal District Court No. 3

of Tarrant County (1525613D)

November 14, 2019

Opinion by Justice Womack

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgments. It is ordered that the judgments of the 

trial court are affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Dana Womack

 Justice Dana Womack
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 115 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Rules in the One 

Hundred Fifteenth Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2017 

Mr. SESSIONS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on 

Rules in the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES. 

3 For the expenses of the Committee on Rules (here4 after in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘Committee’’), 

5 including the expenses of all staff salaries, there shall be 

6 paid, out of the applicable accounts of the House of Rep7 resentatives for committee salaries and expenses, not more 

8 than $6,260,562.20 for the One Hundred Fifteenth Con9 gress. 


emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 115 IH 

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS. 

2 Of the amount specified in section 1— 

3 (1) not more than $3,130,281.10 shall be avail4 able for expenses incurred during the period begin5 ning at noon on January 3, 2017, and ending imme6 diately before noon on January 3, 2018; and 

7 (2) not more than $3,130,281.10 shall be avail8 able for expenses incurred during the period begin9 ning at noon on January 3, 2018, and ending imme10 diately before noon on January 3, 2019. 

11 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS. 

12 Payments under this resolution shall be made on 

13 vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the 

14 Chairman of the Committee, and approved in the manner 

15 directed by the Committee on House Administration. 

16 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS. 

17 Amounts made available under this resolution shall 

18 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by 

19 the Committee on House Administration. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
Exhibit









DIRECTOR COMPENSATION PLAN
(Effective February 7, 2017)
The Director Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) of athenahealth, Inc. (the “Company”) applies to non-employee directors (each, a “Director”), who shall receive the compensation set forth in this Plan for their service on the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”).
	
		
	Cash Compensation*

	Annual Cash Retainers
	Amount

	Director   
	$60,000

	Lead Director   
	$20,000

	Audit Committee Chair   
	$20,000

	Compensation Committee Chair   
	$15,000

	Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chair   
	$12,500

	Special Per Meeting Fees
	 

	Special Committee of the Board   
	$2,000/mtg

	Irregular or unscheduled Board or Committee Meeting**   
	$2,000/mtg




    
*All cash compensation is payable quarterly, in arrears, and shall be pro-rated for any partial period.  
**To be paid at the discretion of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chair.
	
		
	Equity Compensation — Annual Equity Award^

	 
	Award Value

	Director   
	$225,000




    
^The Annual Equity Awards (“Equity Awards”) are subject to the following terms:  


		
	(1)
	The date of grant for the Equity Award shall be the first business day in the month of March;


		
	(2)
	The grant amount of the Equity Award will be the number of whole common stock equivalents closest in value to the quotient of $225,000 divided by the average closing price per share of the Company’s common stock as listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market during the last 30 trading sessions preceding and including the date of grant;


		
	(3)
	The Equity Award will vest in full on the first anniversary of the date of grant, subject to continued service on the Board;


		
	(4)
	Equity Awards granted to new Directors will be pro-rated for partial year service and granted on the first business day of the month immediately following the later of (a) the Director’s initial date of service, or (b) the date on which such Equity Award is approved; and


		
	(5)
	Equity Awards granted under this Plan are made pursuant to the Company’s 2007 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, as amended, and subject to the terms and conditions thereof.  


In addition to the cash and equity compensation described above, the Company reimburses each Director for reasonable travel and other expenses in connection with their attendance at meetings of the Board or committees thereof.
This Plan is prospective from its effective date and will not affect compensation paid or granted before that date.  This Plan may be amended from time to time by vote of the Board of Directors.  This Plan does not affect the obligations of the Company to indemnify directors as set forth in relevant sections of the Company’s charter documents or indemnification agreements.  Questions or issues concerning Plan application and administration will be addressed by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors.
§ 415.12 Accommodation of intergovernmental concerns. ( a ) If a State process provides a State process recommendation to the Department through its single point of contact, the Secretary either— ( 1 ) Accepts the recommendations;
( 2 ) Reaches a mutually agreeable solution with the State process; or
( 3 ) Provides the single point of contact with a written explanation of the decision, as the Secretary in his or her discretion deems appropriate. The Secretary may also supplement the written explanation by also providing the explanation to the single point of contact by telephone, other telecommunication, or other means.
( b ) In any explanation under paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the Secretary informs the single point of contact that: ( 1 ) The Department will not implement its decision for at least ten days after the single point of contact receives the explanation; or
( 2 ) The Secretary has reviewed the decision and determined that, because of unusual circumstances, the waiting period of at least ten days is not feasible.
( c ) For purposes of computing the waiting period under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, a single point of contact is presumed to have received written notification five days after the date of mailing of such notification.
Editorial Note on Part 172
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 172 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; 70 FR 72074, Dec. 1, 2005; and 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 172.866 Synthetic glycerin produced by the hydrogenolysis of carbohydrates. Synthetic glycerin produced by the hydrogenolysis of carbohydrates may be safely used in food, subject to the provisions of this section: ( a ) It shall contain not in excess of 0.2 percent by weight of a mixture of butanetriols.
( b ) It is used or intended for use in an amount not to exceed that reasonably required to produce its intended effect.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

July 9, 2009 

0701 

Order 

 

July 9, 2009 

138696 

SUPERIOR HOTELS, L.L.C., 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v SC: 138696 

 COA: 276836 

MTT: 00-313228 

TOWNSHIP OF MACKINAW, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 10, 2009 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall 

include among the issues to be briefed whether the State Tax Commission has 

jurisdiction, pursuant to MCL 211.154(1), to correct the taxable value of real property 

erroneously recorded on the local assessment roll. 

 The Michigan Townships Association is invited to file a brief amicus curiae. 

Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issue presented in this case 

may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7173

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

CHARLES RAY DEESE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior

District Judge. (7:10-cr-00064-F-1; 7:12-cv-00264-F)

Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey Michael Brandt, ROBINSON & BRANDT, PSC, Covington, 

Kentucky, for Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Thomas B. 

Murphy, Assistant United States Attorneys, Seth Morgan Wood, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles Ray Deese seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Deese has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1924 Urease enzyme preparation from Lactobacillus fermentum. ( a ) This enzyme preparation is derived from the nonpathogenic, nontoxicogenic bacterium *Lactobacillus fermentum.* It contains the enzyme urease (CAS Reg. No. 9002-13-5), which facilitates the hydrolysis of urea to ammonia and carbon dioxide. It is produced by a pure culture fermentation process and by using materials that are generally recognized as safe (GRAS) or are food additives that have been approved for this use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
( b ) The ingredient meets the general and additional requirements for enzyme preparations in the “Food Chemicals Codex,” 3d ed. (1981), pp. 107-110, which is incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20418, or available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .*
( c ) In accordance with § 184.1(b)(1), the ingredient is used in food with no limitation other than current good manufacturing practice. The affirmation of this ingredient as GRAS as a direct human food ingredient is based upon the following current good manufacturing practice conditions of use: ( 1 ) The ingredient is used in wine, as defined in 27 CFR 1.10 and 4.10, as an enzyme as defined in § 170.3(o)(9) of this chapter to convert urea to ammonia and carbon dioxide.
( 2 ) The ingredient is used in food at levels not to exceed current good manufacturing practice. Current good manufacturing practice is limited to use of this ingredient in wine to inhibit formation of ethyl carbamate.
[57 FR 60473, Dec. 21, 1992, as amended at 85 FR 72907, Nov. 16, 2020]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         551,935
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  105,775
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      11,686,629
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,204,082
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,287,672
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,064,520
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,223,152
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,287,672
<SALES>                                      2,474,332
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,474,332
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,272,747
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             424,454
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (214,670)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (214,670)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32.2****CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,I, David Thompson, Secretary and Chief Financial Officer, certify that:1. To my knowledge, this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2. To my knowledge, the information in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of International Absorbents Inc. as of July 31, 2007.     Date: September 11, 2007 /s/ DAVID THOMPSON David Thompson    *Secretary and Chief Financial Officer*
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS IN SUPPORT OF

SNUR MODIFICATION FOR

PREMANUFACTURE NOTICE

(PMN) P-85-0680

DOCKET EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0864

JANUARY 17, 2013
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22 - 0251 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. AMIEL JON GARDIPE JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including January 20, 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 12 2022

12/12/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0251
From: Robert Berman [mailto:bermaneconomics@gmail.com]  

Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 10:45 AM

To: Richard Parker

Cc: Jerry Hodge; Caitlin Johnson; rick.anderson@faypwc.com;

tballo@earthjustice.org; ScottB@lvmetals.com; john.caskey@nema.org;

jerry.corkran@cooperindustries.com; john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov;

adelaski@standardsasap.org; Teckman@nwcouncil.org; gbf1@pge.com;

carlos.gaytan@ge.com; rgreeson@federalpacific.com; bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com;

mhyland@appanet.org; dave.millure@metglas.com; snadel@aceee.org;

wes.patterson@us.abb.com; Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com;

Raymond.Polinski@atimetals.com; srosenstock@eei.org; rroy@nrdc.org;

robert.saint@nreca.coop; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com; mark.stoering@xcelenergy.com;

cabolduc@lbl.gov; kcoughlin@lbl.gov; Brian Coffey; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov; Michael

Rivest; jrossetti@mlgw.org; Jim.creevy@nema.org;

Aaron.Meyers@cooperindustries.com; Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov;

jmauer@standardsasap.org; greg.coulter405@gmail.com; bsmith@federalpacific.com;

pkumar@publicpower.org; ahofmann@publicpower.org; BermanEconomics@gmail.com;

Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com; mwaltner@nrdc.org;

kwinder@mleainc.com; chad.kennedy@us.schneider‐electric.com;

eduardorobles@eaton.com; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com;

carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com; thomas.patzner@us.schneider‐electric.com

Subject: Proposed Revisions to ground rules.

Attached are suggestions for ground rules revisions.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
              INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT AND REPORT ON SCHEDULE
 
We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
33-95630, No. 333-04192, and No. 333-04190 of MiniMed Inc. on Form S-8 of our
report dated January 17, 1998, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
MiniMed Inc. for the year ended January 2, 1998.
 
Our audits of the financial statements referred to in our aforementioned report
also included the financial statement schedule of MiniMed Inc., listed in Item
14. This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In
our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to
the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material
respects the information set forth therein.
 
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
---------------------------------
 
Los Angeles, California
March 26, 1998