alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 92 (Thursday, May 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11780]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP00-268-000]


Destin Pipeline Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff and Requests for Waiver

May 5, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 2, 2000, Destin Pipeline Company, L.L.C. 
(Destin) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original 
Volume No. 1, revised tariff sheets attached as Appendix A to the 
filing, proposed to become effective June 1, 2000.
    Destin states that the purpose of this filing is to make certain 
housekeeping changes and to reflect a change in operator status as a 
result of the pending sale of Southern Natural Gas Company's (Southern) 
one-third ownership interest in Destin to Amoco Destin Pipeline Company 
(Amoco). A change in operator status is necessitated since the original 
operator, Southern, will no longer be a member-owner of Destin. Amoco 
and Tejas Destin, LLC will jointly operate the Destin pipeline system 
as more fully described in the application.
    Destin also requests waiver of Order No. 587-I, to implement 
Internet Communications by December 31, 2000, and of its tariff 
requirements to offer shippers the option of electronic service 
agreements and other legal documents.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-11780 Filed 5-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
§ 25.929 Propeller deicing. ( a ) If certification for flight in icing is sought there must be a means to prevent or remove hazardous ice accumulations that could form in the icing conditions defined in Appendix C of this part and in the portions of Appendix O of this part for which the airplane is approved for flight on propellers or on accessories where ice accumulation would jeopardize engine performance.
( b ) If combustible fluid is used for propeller deicing, §§ 25.1181 through 25.1185 and 25.1189 apply.
[ Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-140, 79 FR 65525, Nov. 4, 2014]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Advisory Environmental Health Sciences Council, May 15, 2000, 8:30 AM to May 16, 2000, 2:00 PM, Building 31C, Conference Room 6, National Institutes of Health, 3100 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on April 13, 2000, 65 FR 19916.                

The NAEHSC meeting will be held for one day on May 15, 2000. The Open and Closed Sessions will be as follows: Open 8:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. and Closed 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. The meeting is partially Closed to the public.

Dated: May 1, 2000.

Anna Snouffer,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 00-11436  Filed 5-5-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 32.1


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


In  connection  with  the  quarterly  report  of  Meridian  Holdings,  Inc. (the
"Company") on  Form  10-QSB/A  for the period  ending  March 31  2004  as  filed
with   the   Securities   and   Exchange   Commission   on    the   date  hereof
(the "Report"),   we,  Anthony  C.  Dike, the  Chief  Executive Officer, of  the
Company,  certify,  pursuant   to   18 U.S.C.   1350,  as   adopted  pursuant to
Section   906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that:

(1)  The  Report  fully  complies  with  the  requirements  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 financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed  original  of this written  statement  required  by Section 906,
or other  document  authenticating,  acknowledging, or otherwise adopting
the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of
this  written  statement  required by Section 906, has  been  provided to
Meridian Holdings, Inc., and  will  be retained  by   Meridian  Holdings,
Inc.,  and furnished to the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.


DATE:  February 25,   2005        By:  /s/  Anthony  C.  Dike
                                        -------------------
                                         Anthony  C.  Dike
                                        Chairman  and  CEO
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

April 14, 2008

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

 [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 06-14539

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 05-20791-CR-FAM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee 

Cross-Appellant, 

versus 

JUAN VASQUEZ, 

Defendant-Appellant 

Cross-Appellee, 

SELIN SANTANA, 

RUDYS MARINE, 

Defendants-Appellants. 

________________________

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

_________________________

(April 14, 2008)
Honorable Pasco M. Bowman, II, United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit *

sitting by designation.

2

Before WILSON, COX and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges. *

PER CURIAM:

After a careful consideration of the briefs, review of the record on appeal,

and having heard oral argument in the matter, we find no reversible error.

Appellants raise no less than ten issues on appeal. Only one issue, however,

merits discussion. Juan Vasquez (“Vasquez”) argues that the imposition of a 240-

month sentence, which was approximately double the sentence at the top of his

court-calculated advisory guideline range (97-121 months), was unreasonable

because the district court focused single-mindedly on its finding of obstruction of

justice, which Vasquez had already received an enhancement for. Vasquez

attempts to rely on United States v. Crisp, 454 F.3d 1285, 1292 (11 Cir. 2006) th

(holding that the district court’s unjustified reliance upon the single goal of

restitution to the detriment of all of the other sentencing factors produced an

unreasonable sentence).

We are not persuaded that the district court was “single-minded” in its

consideration of the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors. We agree with the government

that while the district court emphasized its finding that Vasquez committed
3

perjury, it also based the sentence on other factors, such as: (1) the nature and

circumstances of Vasquez’s offenses were very serious; (2) Vasquez was, on the

whole, more culpable than his co-defendant, Selin Santana, who received a 200

month sentence; and (3) Vasquez was responsible for more drug quantity than the

amount of three kilograms entered by the jury on the special verdict form.

In light of all of the findings made by the district court at sentencing, we do

not hold that the sentence imposed was unreasonable. Accordingly, we affirm. 

AFFIRMED.
#### INGRAHAM, et al. v DADE COUNTY, et al.

Case No. 90-148-AP

Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Dade County

November 1, 1991

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

John G. Fletcher, Esquire, for appellants.

John Dellagloria, Esquire, and Debora Turner, Esquire, Assistant City Attorneys, for appellee, City of Miami Beach.

Deborah Mastín, Esquire, for appellee, Dade County.

Alan Gold, Esquire, for appellee, Pacific International Construction.

Before ROBINSON, BLOOM, FIERRO, JJ.

*55OPINION OF THE COURT

Per curiam affirmed. The original building permit was properly issued. Nine (9) months later the property owners appealed challenging the validity of that permit. During that nine months period, there was a modification of the building site to comply with setback requirements and that modification was considered insignificant by the appropriate agencies of the City of Miami Beach. Therefore, the approval of the Dade County Shoreline Review Committee was not necessary since it had previously granted its approval prior to issuance of the building permit. However, even though not required, the Dade County Shoreline Review Committee ultimately approved the modified site plan. Jurisdiction was effective in each agency for the actions which each took.

Thereafter, the Dade County Board of Rules and Appeals properly determined that all. administrative conditions prerequisite to the issuance of the building permit had occurred.

The property owners were accorded the right to be heard even though they initially remained silent for some nine months. They then were heard and their contentions were rejected. The site plans complied with all aspects of the then applicable zoning laws which, it appears, are more intense than a newly adopted zoning code. Therefore, there was compliance with the procedures for issuance of the subject building permit.

AFFIRMED.
850

850

750

850

850

650

800

850

700

650

700

650

700

700

850

800

850

700

750

750

650

850

700

850

850

850

800

850

16

16

L A C H A N C A C A R D

S O L D H W Y 1 6

C A N A L E S L N

F M 3 0 7 3 F M 3 0 7 3

A R M S T R O N G R D

A A M A R T IN E Z R D A A M A R T IN E Z R D

A R M S T R O N G R D

C H IV O R D

F M 3 0 7 3

P O L O C R E A M E R L N

C A N A L E S L N

16

16

L A C H A N C A C A R D

S O L D H W Y 1 6

C A N A L E S L N

F M 3 0 7 3 F M 3 0 7 3

A R M S T R O N G R D

A A M A R T IN E Z R D A A M A R T IN E Z R D

A R M S T R O N G R D

C H IV O R D

F M 3 0 7 3

P O L O C R E A M E R L N

C A N A L E S L N

Armstrong

Oil Field

Las Animas

Oil and

Gas Field

Nuevo

Windmill

Chorrito

Windmill

Azucar

Windmill

Armstrong

Ranch

Armstrong

Ranch

San

Pablo

Ranch

Bruni SE

McCampbell

Ranch

Hebbronville Albercas

Ranch

Alta Vista

Ranch SW

Thompsonville

Randado

FEET

FEET

870 000FEET

98°45'

50'

15'

98°

27°

27°07'30"

30"

30"

47' 98°

50'

27°

52' 47'30"

30" 45'

30"

52'

15' 27°

07'

98°

12' 30"

10'

30"

10'

12'

16 970 000

900 000FEET

16 940000

E 5

30

5

30

5

000m

5 000m

30

5

30

5

30

000m

30

5

30

5

30

30

30

30

5

30

5

30

30

5 5

30

5

30

5

30

5

30

000m

30

30

5

5

30

5 5

5

5

30 30

30

5

30

5

30

30

5 16

10

19

14

18

13

N

08

15

20

13

17

03

13

07

09

21

17

06

08

N

13

02

18 22

E 16 24

07

03

10

11

21

14

11

23

12

04

23

09

19

22

05 05

01 01

14

06

14

15

04

20 24

12

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

TEXAS

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

TX 2798-224

ARMSTRONG RANCH, TX

2010

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Interstate Route US Route State Route

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

ARMSTRONG RANCH QUADRANGLE

TEXAS

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

Zone 14R

Imagery......................................................NAIP, April 2008

Roads.....................................US Census Bureau TIGER data

with limited USGS updates, 2008

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2008

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 1995

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 2008

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator,

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: Texas Coordinate System of 1983

(south zone)

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

This map was produced to conform with version 0.5.10 of the

draft USGS Standards for 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Maps.

A metadata file associated with this product is also draft version 0.5.10

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0 1

MILES

MN

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

GN

UTM GRID AND 2010 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

0° 5 ́

2 MILS

5° 19 ́

95 MILS

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

14R

NR

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
§ 27.753 Main float design. ( a ) *Bag floats.* Each bag float must be designed to withstand— ( 1 ) The maximum pressure differential that might be developed at the maximum altitude for which certification with that float is requested; and
( 2 ) The vertical loads prescribed in § 27.521(a), distributed along the length of the bag over three-quarters of its projected area.
( b ) *Rigid floats.* Each rigid float must be able to withstand the vertical, horizontal, and side loads prescribed in § 27.521. These loads may be distributed along the length of the float.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-19-00284-CV

___________________________

Original Proceeding

Trial Court No. C2018043

Before Kerr, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Birdwell, J.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

IN RE NEWTON B. SCHWARTZ, SR., Relator
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus and is of 

the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for habeas

corpus is denied.

Per Curiam

Delivered: August 2, 2019
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1177 CA 16-00010 PRESENT: CARNI, J.P., LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, CURRAN, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.

BARBARA TULLY, ALSO KNOWN AS BARBARA BIELLE, PLAINTIFF,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

TRANSITOWN SOUTH ASSOCIATES, LLC, TRANSITOWN PLAZA ASSOCIATES, LLC, GIAN PROPERTIES, LLC, AND GIAN PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, DEFENDANTS.

--------------------------------------------------- TRANSITOWN SOUTH ASSOCIATES, LLC, TRANSITOWN PLAZA ASSOCIATES, LLC, GIAN PROPERTIES, LLC, AND GIAN PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,

V

TIGER STRIPE, LLC, THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

KENNEY SHELTON LIPTAK NOWAK LLP, BUFFALO (RICHARD T. SARAF OF COUNSEL), FOR THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

SUGARMAN LAW FIRM, LLP, BUFFALO (MICHAEL RIEHLER OF COUNSEL), FOR THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Donna M. Siwek, J.), entered October 8, 2015. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that part of the motion of defendants-third-party plaintiffs seeking an order requiring third-party defendant to defend and indemnify them and pay their attorneys’ fees.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order insofar as appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, and that part of the motion of defendants-third-party plaintiffs seeking an order requiring third-party defendant to defend and indemnify them and pay their attorneys’ fees is denied.

Memorandum: Third-party defendant, Tiger Stripe, LLC (Tiger Stripe), appeals from an order that, inter alia, granted in part the motion of defendants-third-party plaintiffs (defendants) for summary judgment and ordered Tiger Stripe to defend and indemnify defendants and pay their attorneys’ fees. Tiger Stripe contends that defendants failed to establish as a matter of law that they are entitled to contractual indemnification. We agree. The snow-removal services-2- 1177 CA 16-00010
contract required Tiger Stripe to indemnify defendants against claims “arising out of or resulting from performance of services under [the] Contract,” including claims attributable to bodily injury “caused in whole or in part by acts or omissions” of Tiger Stripe. Inasmuch as there are issues of fact concerning the alleged culpability of Tiger Stripe, we conclude that Supreme Court erred in granting that part of the motion ( see Johnson v Wal-Mart , 125 AD3d 1468, 1469; Pieri v Forest City Enters. , 238 AD2d 911, 913).

Entered: December 23, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofthe Company for the period ended March 31, 2005, I, Anthony J. Gould, ExecutiveVice President, Chief Financial and Chief Accounting Officer of  the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  that:

 

(1)                                  suchQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31,2005, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           the informationcontained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the periodended March 31, 2005, fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of Western Sierra Bancorp.

 

 
| Date: May 6, 2005 |                                    |                  |
|-------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------|
|              |                                    | /s/  Anthony J. Gould |   |   |
|              | Chief  Financial and Accounting Officer |
|                   |                                         |                       |  |  |

 

----
The Honorable Cynthia Holcomb Hall, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth *

Circuit, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 98-1278EM

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States 

* District Court for the Eastern

v. * District of Missouri.

*

Matthew Cox, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

_____________

 Submitted: November 19, 1998

Filed: November 27, 1998 

_____________

Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, FAGG, and HALL, Circuit Judges. *

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Matthew Cox appeals his conviction and sentence for possession with intent to

distribute cocaine base and being a felon in possession of a firearm. Cox raises several

arguments related to the admission of evidence offered by the Government and the

prosecutor's closing argument. Cox also raises an argument about his sentence.

Because Cox's appeal involves the straightforward application of settled principles of

law, we conclude that a discussion of the issues by the panel will serve no useful
-2- -

purpose. We have carefully considered Cox's arguments and find them to be without

merit. We thus affirm Cox's conviction and sentence. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
§ 29.954 Fuel system lightning protection. The fuel system must be designed and arranged to prevent the ignition of fuel vapor within the system by— ( a ) Direct lightning strikes to areas having a high probability of stroke attachment;
( b ) Swept lightning strokes to areas where swept strokes are highly probable; and
( c ) Corona and streamering at fuel vent outlets.
[Amdt. 29-26, 53 FR 34217, Sept. 2, 1988]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

In re:

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO,

PROMESA

Title III

as representative of Case No. 17-BK-3283 (LTS)

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, et al., (Jointly Administered)

Debtors.1

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule 83D(a) of the Local Civil Rules of the 

United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, Rule 2002, 9007 and 9010(b) of the

Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedures, made applicable to these proceedings by Section 310 of 

the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (“PROMESA”), 48 U.S.C. 

§ 2170 et seq., and sections 102(1) and 1109(b) of title 11 of the United States Code, made 

applicable to these proceedings by Section 301 of PROMESA, the undersigned attorney hereby 

joins Navarro-Cabrer Law Offices as local counsel to Bettina M. Whyte, the COFINA Agent (the 

“COFINA Agent”) and enters her appearance in the above-captioned Title III case (the “Title III 

Case”) as co-counsel to the COFINA Agent and requests to be served with all motions, pleadings, 

papers and processes in this matter.

 

1 The Debtors in these Title III Cases, along with each Debtor’s respective Title III case number listed as a

bankruptcy case number due to software limitations and the last four (4) digits of each Debtor’s federal tax 

identification number, as applicable, are: (i) Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 

3283-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3481); (ii) Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation 

(“COFINA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3284-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 8474); (iii) 

Puerto Rico Highways and Transportation Authority (“HTA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3567-LTS) 

(Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3808); and (iv) Employees Retirement System of the Government of 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (“ERS”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3566-LTS) (Last Four Digits of 

Federal Tax ID: 9686).

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3993 Filed:10/01/18 Entered:10/01/18 10:42:29 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court 

using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to all attorneys of record.

Dated: October 1, 2018

San Juan, Puerto Rico

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Ayleen Charles

Ayleen Charles

USDC – PR No. 210702

NAVARRO-CABRER LAW OFFICES

El Centro I, Suite 206

500 Muñoz Rivera Avenue

San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918

Telephone: (787) 764-9595

Facsimile: (787) 765-7575

Email: acharles@navarrolawpr.com

Local Counsel to the COFINA Agent

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3993 Filed:10/01/18 Entered:10/01/18 10:42:29 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2