alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 301

#### Editorial Note:

In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations.

References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

#### § 301.6501(n)-3 Certain set-asides described in section 4942(g)(2).

Where a deficiency of tax of a private foundation results from the failure of an amount set aside by such foundation for a specific project to be treated as a qualifying distribution under section 4942(g)(2)(B)(ii)(II), such deficiency may be assessed within two years after the expiration of the period within which a deficiency may be assessed for the taxable year to which the amount set aside relates.

[T.D. 7838, 47 FR 44251, Oct. 7, 1982]
Cite as 2016 Ark. 311

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS

No. D-16-780

IN RE: JAMES H. PILKINTON, JR.

ARKANSAS BAR NO. 73094

Opinion Delivered September 15, 2016 

PER CURIAM

On recommendation of the Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct, we

hereby accept the voluntary surrender, in lieu of probable disbarment proceedings, of the

license of James H. Pilkinton, Jr., of Hope, Arkansas, to practice law in the State of Arkansas.

In his petition to voluntarily surrender his law license, filed with this court on September 2,

2016, Mr. Pilkinton acknowledged an investigation regarding irregularities in his IOLTA

account by the Committee on Professional Conduct and stated that he wished to avoid the

expense, distress, and embarrassment of disbarment proceedings. The name of James H.

Pilkinton, Jr. shall be removed from the registry of licensed attorneys, and he is barred and

enjoined from engaging in the practice of law in the State of Arkansas.

It is so ordered.
ilies

= if ea a /)) ;

~ Dames Sasa TH He Dee emer
wed he aon -
Ueeread Toten Sac rt Lane BIH Mt Fay (| ys ee Fo
on

eee pores eras my pond «1 somed by Ae atm gnomes fa
Sonam ala ae Conese ern nerriererre
The om os mew oot ma Me r ”
42 2 Coens Pewere Degen omteine from ity Umewh Margene Wien

yRUthon oF pionemme ate

MeTMETE COMTOUE PUTEERALE ° METER TO SMAKWLRN BET,
MIPPLEMMESTTD WY 2 METEN ineTTRWAR

DATUM eft KNEE LO AT

| aera catia eens
—— 3 a a a) —

“sis

BRISTOL BAY NORTH
NOS NO 36
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6643

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

GERALD ADRIAN WHEELER, a/k/a Bay-Bay,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, 

Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:06-cr-00363-RJC-3; 3:10-cv-00289-

RJC)

Submitted: October 26, 2012 Decided: November 7, 2012

Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gerald Adrian Wheeler, Appellant Pro Se. C. Nicks Williams, 

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

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Gerald Adrian Wheeler seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 

Supp. 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) (2006). 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) 

(2006). 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 Wheeler has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 

We note that Wheeler’s claim for retroactive application of the 

Supreme Court’s opinion in Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 130 S. 

Ct. 2577 (2010), and our opinion in United States v. Simmons, 
3

649 F.3d 237, 241-45 (4th Cir. 2011) (en banc), fails in light 

of our recent opinion in United States v. Powell, 691 F.3d 554 

(4th Cir. 2012). 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
ACTIO N 

# X SlO-110125-03 2

CONTRO L N O January25 , 201 1 rp,\RTViENTO F 

### •'PORTATIO N

)N 3 ; ' i* v'
. \

PI : S U Th e Honorabl e RayLaHoo d ' -' " ' ' ^ ^ Secretary U.S
. Departmen t o fTransportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenue , S.E
. Washington , D.C
. 2059 0 Re : Continuatio n o fAlask a Airlines ' Essentia l Ai rServic e a t Cordova
. Gustavus
. Petersburg
. Wranqell
. an d Yakutat
. Alaska
. Docke t OST-1998-489 9 Dea rSecretaryLaHood : Thi s lette ri s t o expres s stron g support fo rth e selectio n o fAlask a Airline s t o continu e t o provid e essentia l ai rservic e t o ou rcommunity
. Alaska' s curren t patter n o fservic e - usin g je t aircraf t - meet s crucia l need s tha t woul d b e difficult , i fno t impossible , t o mee t wit h an yothe rtyp e o fservic e o raircraf t type : Alaska' s servic e connect s Southeas t Alask a passenger s t o on e o rmor e majo r communitie s o finterest , wit h single-plan e servic e t o Anchorage , Juneau , Ketchika n o r Seattle
. Fro m thes e hubs , ou rcommunit yca n acces s th e airline' s extensiv e rout e syste m an d benefi t fro m it s marketin g relationship s wit h othe rcarriers
. Th e 737-40 0 combinatio n ("combi" ) passenge ran d carg o aircraft , whic h Alask a Airline s propose s t o continu e usin g o n thi s route , provide s freight , mai l an d carg o capacit ytha t a non-je t carrie rsimpl ycanno t provide
. Further , th e 737-40 0 comb i aircraf t i s equippe d wit h Require d fslavigatio n Performanc e Technolog yprecisio n technology , whic h enable s th e airlin e t o reliabl yacces s th e airport durin g inclemen t weather , thu s reducin g diversion s an d cancellation s and , i n turn , enablin g peopl e an d product s t o dependabl yreac h th e community
. I n sum , Alaska' s je t servic e i s critica l t o th e economi cwel l bein g o fou r community
. Fo rthes e reasons , w e respectfull yurg e DO Tt o selec t Alask a Airline s t o continu e t o provid e essentia l ai rservic e t o Southeas t Alaska , a s th e airlin e ha s successfull ydon e fo r mor e tha n thirt yyears . Sincerely , Tash a L
. Peterma n
cc : Susa n Kurland , Assistan t Secretaryfo rAviatio n an d Internationa l Affair s Denni s DeVany , Chief , EA S an d Domesti cAnalysi s Th e Honorabl e Sea n Parnell , Governor , Stat e o fAlask a Mar cA
. Luiken , Commissioner , Alask a Stat e Departmen t o fTransportatio n an d Publi cFacilitie s

### Pettiford , Mari e (OST ) From : Tash a Peterma n [tashapeterman@gmail.com ] Sent : Tuesday , January25 , 201 1 12:3 2 P M To : LaHood , Ra y(OST) ; Kurland , Susa n (OST) ; Devany
. Denni s (OST) ; Sean.parnell@alaska.gov ; Marc.luiken@alaska.go v Subject : EA S lette ro f support 201 1 Attachments : EA S lette ro f suppor t 201 1 signed.do c A lette r of m y support . Sincerely , TashaL . Peterma

n

-a - :i^
. 

### :^.t= , 

# o9 ^ e n C O
No. 00-5804.

#### Major *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS




We consent to the incorporation by reference in each of Centennial Bancorp's
Form S-8 Registration Statement Nos. 33-44701, 33-86650 and 333-32081, and in
Centennial Bancorp's Annual Report on Form 10-K as of and for the year ended
December 31, 1999, of our report dated January 21, 2000, on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements of Centennial Bancorp and subsidiaries as of
and for the years ended December 31, 1999 and 1998, which are incorporated by
reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


/S/ SYMONDS, EVANS & LARSON, P.C.




Portland, Oregon
March 23, 2000
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Central African Republic National Day

# 									Central African Republic National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

December 1, 2021

On behalf of the United States of America, I congratulate the people of the Central African Republic on your National Day as you celebrate your nation, your communities, and your families, under your national symbol of “Dignity, Unity and Work.”

The United States is a committed partner of the Central African Republic.  Building on the ties forged over several decades through the Peace Corps and other programs, U.S. assistance strengthens rule of law, expands access to justice, promotes respect for human rights, and provides lifesaving assistance for the Central African Republic’s citizens.

Working together, “*maboko na maboko*” (hand in hand) we can take the steps towards the peace, stability, and prosperity that all Central Africans yearn for.

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsCentral African RepublicOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

Editorial Note on Part 360
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 360 appear at 79 FR 8860, Feb. 14, 2014.

§ 360.43 Effective date of request for payment. The Department of the Treasury will treat the receipt of a bond with an appropriate request for payment by: ( a ) A Federal Reserve Bank or Branch;
( b ) The Bureau of the Fiscal Service; or
( c ) A paying agent authorized to pay that bond, as the date upon which the rights of the parties are fixed for the purpose of payment.
#### NEW ENGLAND OYSTER HOUSE OF NORTH MIAMI, INC. and Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, Appellants, v. Paul YUHAS and Antoinette Yuhas, Appellees.

No. 73-648.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 9, 1974.

Rehearing Denied May 20, 1974.

Wicker, Smith, Pyszka, Blomqvist & Davant, Miami, for appellants.

Rentz, McClellan & Haggard, Miami, for appellees.

Before CARROLL, HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

HENDRY, Judge.

This is an appeal by the defendants from an adverse final judgment entered in the trial court pursuant to a jury verdict.

The jury awarded plaintiff, Antoinette Yuhas, $25,000 in damages and her husband, Paul Yuhas, $1,500, upon the plain*100tiffs’ complaint alleging negligent care and maintenance of a parking lot at the defendant’s (New Englánd Oyster House) place of business. Mrs. Yuhas sustained personal injuries when she tripped and fell on a concrete curb in the parking lot.

The sole point raised by the appellant on this appeal is: whether it is reversible error to refuse to allow defendant to impeach plaintiff’s credibility by using plaintiff’s statement in her deposition that she lied on her income tax return ?

Prior to the commencement of the trial of this case, plaintiffs’ counsel announced to the court he was dropping Mrs. Yuhas’ claim for lost wages. At that point, defendants’ counsel requested the court to permit him to impeach Mrs. Yuhas’ credibility anyway from her deposition in which she stated that she had failed to declare on her tax returns the full value of tips which she earned as a waitress at another restaurant.

The court in response to the request ruled as follows:

> “The dropping of the claim for lost wages is acceptable.

> “Since that is not an issue of this case, it will be my ruling you cannot impeach on that.”

In our view, the trial judge was correct in this ruling, and appellants’ contention that the testimony in Mrs. Yuhas’ deposition should have been permitted for purposes of impeachment in that “the whole case rested on her [Mrs. Yuhas’] veracity” is without merit.

A ruling by the trial judge on matters pertaining to the reputation for truth and veracity of a plaintiff is within the sound discretion of the trial judge, and will not be reversed unless the appellant establishes an abuse thereof which has resulted in prejudice to his case. Pandula v. Fonseca, 1940, 145 Fla. 395, 199 So. 358.

Obviously, the trial judge determined that the testimonial evidence in the deposition which defendants sought to employ to impeach Mrs. Yuhas was too remote to the issue presented in this case. See 35 Fla.Jur. Witnesses § 228.

Therefore, for the reasons stated, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
#### § 542.703 Penalty imposition.

If, after considering any written response to the Pre-Penalty Notice and any relevant facts, OFAC determines that there was a violation by the alleged violator named in the Pre-Penalty Notice and that a civil monetary penalty is appropriate, OFAC may issue a Penalty Notice to the violator containing a determination of the violation and the imposition of the monetary penalty. For additional details concerning issuance of a Penalty Notice, see appendix A to part 501 of this chapter. The issuance of the Penalty Notice shall constitute final agency action. The violator has the right to seek judicial review of that final agency action in Federal district court.
November 24, 1999

No. 98-1701.

No. 98-1706.

#### United States *v.*Locke, Governor of Washington, et al.; and International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (Intertanko) *v.*Locke, Governor of Washington, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 527 U. S. 1063.] Motion of the Solicitor General for divided argument *1016granted. Motion of respondent/intervenor for divided argument denied.
Form of the Company's Common Stock Certificate



 Exhibit 4.1 

 
 



 

	
	








 PAR PETROLEUM CORPORATION 

CORPORATE STOCK TRANSFER, INC. 
 TRANSFER FEE: AS REQUIRED 
 THE SHARES REPRESENTED BY THIS
CERTIFICATE HAVE RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS ATTACHED THERETO PURSUANT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF THE CORPORATION, DATED AUGUST 31, 2012, AND THE STOCKHOLDERS’ AGREEMENT, DATED AUGUST 31,
2012. THE CORPORATION WILL FURNISH TO A SHAREHOLDER, ON DEMAND AND WITHOUT CHARGE, A FULL COPY OF THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION AND/OR A FULL COPY OF THE STOCKHOLDERS’ AGREEMENT. 

The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though
they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
  

											
	 TEN COM
	 	-	 	as tenants in common	 		 		 	
	 TEN ENT
	 	-	 	as tenants by the entireties	 	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT -	 	 Custodian

	 JT TEN
	 	-	 	as joint tenants with right	 		 		 	(Cust)                          
      (Minor)
		 		 	of survivorship and not as	 		 		 	under Uniform Gifts to Minors
		 		 	tenants in common	 		 		 	
		 		 		 		 	Act	 	  

		 		 		 		 		 	(State)

 Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 

 
  
  

			
	 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER

IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE

 
	 	
	 	 	
	 	 	
	 	 	

  

					
	 FOR VALUE RECEIVED,
	 	  
	 	hereby sell, assign and transfer unto

  
  

 
 PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND
ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE 
  
  

 
  
  

 
  
  

 
  

			
	  
	 	Shares

 of the Common Stock represented by the within Certificate and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint 

 

			
	  
	  	Attorney to transfer

 the said stock on the books of the within-named Corporation, with full power of substitution in the premises. 

Dated:                    20  
  , 
  

					
		 	Signature: X	 	  

	Signature(s) Guaranteed:	 		 	
		 	Signature: X	 	  


 THE SIGNATURE(S) TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME(S) AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY
PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER. THE SIGNATURE(S) SHOULD BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (Banks, Stockbrokers, Savings and Loan Associations and Credit Unions) WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED
SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM, PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

July 18, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00432

- CR

Otto Ray KIETZMAN

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the Criminal District Court, Magistrate Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013W0631 Honorable Andrew Carruthers, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On July 11, 2014, a deputy clerk of this court contacted Ms. Connie Calvert, the court reporter responsible for preparing the unfiled portion of the reporter’s record in this appeal, requesting the status of the filing. Ms. Calvert responded that she had not been paid for the record. On July 14, 2014, the deputy clerk left a message for Ms. Calvert informing her that a supplemental clerk’s record had been filed establishing that the appellant is indigent and is

entitle d to the record without payment of any fees. On July 16, 2014, the deputy clerk left a second message for Ms. Calvert inquiring about the status of the filing. Ms. Calvert has not responded to the messages. It is therefore ORDERED that Ms. Calvert file her portion of the reporter’s record in this appeal no later than ten days from the date of this order. Given the status of this appeal, any requests for extensions of time to file the record will be disfavored.

_________________________________ Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 18th day of July, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
.~CED S7•4~.

~

~ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX

~ •~5’ RO 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 941 05-3901 

## SEP 13 2012 Mr. Richard W. Corey Deputy Executive Officer CaliforniaAir Resources Board PostOffice Box 2815 Sacramento, California 95812 DearMr. Corey: OnJuly3, 2012, the CaliforniaAir Resources Board submitted revisions tothe California State Implementation Plan. We have reviewed materials submitted with the following rule and found that it flilfihlsthe completeness criteria in 40 Code ofFederal Regulations Part 51, AppendixV.



## LAPCD/AQMD Rule# RuleTitle

~ Yolo-Solano 3.24 Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration This addresses all revisions in this submittal. In the coming months we will reviewthe complete revisions foraction pursuantto Clean AirActsection 110(k). Questions regarding ourcompleteness reviewshould be directedto Cynthia G. Allen at (415) 947-4120. Sincerely,

~ <~.Dço~ahJordan 

# (

# J Director, AirDivision
cc: Mr. Mat Ehrhardt, APCO Yolo-Solano AQMD Mr. Michael Guzzetta, Manager Rule Evaluation Section Stationary Source Division

Printed on Recycled PaperEPA Region 9 SIP COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST To evaluate compliance with 40 CFR 51, AppendixV

= Complete

_________________________ = Incomplete

= NotApplicable To Rule

= Material Missing V Submittal Date July 3,2012 District Name Yolo-SolanoAQMD Date Reviewed September 11, 2012. V EPA Reviewer C.G. Allen Key: C 

### NIA 0

V 3.24~ ADMINISTRATIVE MATERIALS (perAppéndixV, Section 2.1) V V

~ (a) Submittal letterfrom Governor/designee X V V (b) Evidence of adoption V 

## x V (c) State/District legal authority to adopt V V V X V V (dl) Copyof actual rule/plan •V 

## x V V V (d2) Rule changes indicated by underline/cross-out V V (e) Proofthat action met procedural requirements 

## x V V (f) Copy of public notice V X V V (g) Certification that hearing fulfilled public notice X V (h) V Public comments & agency response N/A V V TECHNICAL SUPPORT (perAppendixV, Section 2.2) V (a) Regulated pollutants identified N/A
V(b) Affected sources & attainment status identified X (c) Rule/plan emissions impact V V (d) Attainment, PSD & other required demonstration N/A (e) Modeling support as appropriate N/A V (f)

. Reliance on continuous emission reductions 

## x V V V V V (g) Evidence, of limits & other needed requirements N/A V

V(~) Justification fordeviation from EPA policy N/A OVERALL COMPLETENESS C V Notes:
#### § 566.319 United States.

The term *United States* means the United States, its territories and possessions, and all areas under the jurisdiction or authority thereof.
Federal Trade Commission ! Bureau of Consumer Protection ! Office of Consumer and Business Education

FTC Business Alert

Some marketers send email as a quick and cheap way to promote their goods and services. Be aware that

the claims that you make in any advertisement for your products or services, including those sent by email, must

be truthful. This means that you must honor any promises you make to remove consumers from email mailing

lists.

If your email solicitations claim that consumers can opt-out of receiving future messages by following your

removal instructions, such as “click here to unsubscribe” or “reply for removal,” then the removal options must

function as you claim. That means any hyperlinks in the email message must be active and the unsubscribe

process must work. Keep in mind:

● You should review the removal claims made in your email solicitations to ensure that you are complying with

any representations that you make.

● If you provide consumers a hyperlink for removal, then that hyperlink should be accessible by consumers.

● If you provide an email address for removal, then that address should be functioning and capable of receiving removal requests. It may be deceptive to claim that consumers can “unsubscribe” by responding to a

“dead” email address.

● Any system in place to handle unsubscribe requests should process those requests in an effective manner.

The Federal Trade Commission Act prohibits unfair or deceptive advertising in any medium, including in

email. That is, advertising must tell the truth and not mislead consumers. A claim can be misleading if it implies

something that’s not true or if it omits information necessary to keep the claims from bring misleading.

Other points to consider if you market through commercial email:

● Disclaimers and disclosures must be clear and conspicuous. That is, consumers must be able to notice,

read or hear, and understand the information. Still, a disclaimer or disclosure alone usually is not enough to

remedy a false or deceptive claim.

● If you promised refunds to dissatisfied customers, you must make them.

The FTC works for the consumer to prevent fraudulent, deceptive and unfair business practices in the

marketplace and to provide information to help consumers spot, stop and avoid them. To file a complaint or to

get free information on consumer issues, call toll-free, 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357), or use the

complaint form at www.ftc.gov. The FTC enters Internet, telemarketing, identity theft and other fraud-related

complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to hundreds of civil and criminal law

enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad.

“Remove Me” Responses and Responsibilities:

Email Marketers Must Honor “Unsubscribe” Claims

April 2002

F C EDERAL RADE OMMISSION T FTC OR HE ONSUMER

1-877-FTC-HELP www.ftc.gov