alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed with the Federal Maritime Commission an application for licenses as Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder—Ocean Transportation Intermediary pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 as amended (46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR 515). 

Persons knowing of any reason why the following applicants should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of Transportation Intermediaries, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573. 

## Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier Ocean Transportation Intermediary Applicants 

Universal Consolidated Services, Inc., 145-32 157th Street, Suite 228, Jamaica, NY 11434; Officer: Nicholas Kim, Vice President (Qualifying Individual), 

Peninsula Cargo, Inc., 11124 Narbel Avenue, Downey, CA 90241; Officers: Modesto M. Pascual, Vice President (Qualifying Individual), Roman Silvestre, President 

## Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder Transportation Intermediary Applicants 

Global Freight International, Inc. d/b/a, Interfreight Corporation, P.O. Box 6432, 100 Everett Avenue, Chelsea, MA 02150; Officers: Bernard A. Wilcken, President (Qualifying Individual), Ian C. Wilcken, Secretary 

Dated: May 5, 2000. 

Bryant L. VanBrakle, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 00-11714 Filed 5-9-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
# Fou **rth Court of Appeals**

**San Antonio, Texas**

May 1, 2017

No. 04

- 17

- 00039

- CR

Michael RODRIGUEZ

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR2993 Honorable Lorina I. Rummel, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant’s attorney has filed a motion seeking access to a portion of the record that is sealed. The motion is GRANTED, and appellant’s attorney is directed to contact the Clerk of this court to make arrangements to review the sealed record. If appellee desires access to the sealed record at a later date, appellee must contact the Clerk of this court to make the necessary arrangements. All parties and their attorney s are ORDERED : (1) to fully comply with the

instr uctions provided by the Clerk of this court regarding their access to the sealed record; and (2) not to share the contents of the sealed record with any person.

Additionally , we previously issued an order stating that this appeal would be dismissed

pursu ant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2 (d) unless an amended trial court certification showing appellant has the right to appeal was made part of the appellate record by April 10, 2017. We subsequently granted appellant’s motion for filing of the rep orter’s record. The reporter’s record has now been filed. We, therefore, extend the deadline for filing an y amended

trial court certification. It is ORDERED that t his appeal will be dismissed under Rule 25.2 (d)

unless an amended trial court certification s howing appellant has the right to appeal is made part of the appellate record on or before June 2 , 2017

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(d).

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 1st day of May, 2017

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
[S. F. No. 1343.

In Bank.

September 2, 1898.]

#### J. F. COONAN, Respondent, v. J. LOEWENTHAL, Appellant.

Appeal—Dismissal—1Time of Filing Undertaking—Conflicting Affidavits.—A motion to dismiss an appeal on the ground that the undertaking on appeal was filed before the notice of appeal was served will not be granted where the time of the service of the notice does not appear from the record, and upon the question of its service before or after the filing of the undertaking, *■*the affidavits of various parties who were acquainted with the facts squarely contradict each other.

MOTIOU to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Humboldt County and from an order denying a new trial. E. W. Wilson, Judge.

• The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Chamberlain & Wheeler, for Appellant.

S. M. Buck, and J. F. Coonan, for Respondent.

*73THE COURT.

Respondent moves to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that the undertaking on appeal was filed before the notice of appeal was served. The notice of appeal shows by indorsement that it was served, but the particular day upon which it was served does not appear thereon. The material question is, was this notice.of appeal served upon the twenty-seventh day of January, or upon the following day? Upon this question the affidavits of various parties wbo were acquainted with the fact are before the court. Those affidavits squarely contradict each other, and under such circumstances we will not order the appeal dismissed.

The motion to dismiss is denied.
#### STATE OF FLORIDA v WATT

Case No. 89-0088 AC (A) 02 (Lower Court Case No. 89-03088 1-TC A02)

Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County

March 25, 1990

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

David H. Bludworth, State Attorney, and Robert S. Jaegers, Assistant State Attorney, for appellant.

Richard W. Springer and Catherine Mazzullo, Springer & Springer, for appellee.

Before SHOLTS, MOUNTS, COLBATH, JJ.

OPINION OF THE COURT

SHOLTS, J.

The criminal appellate division previously considered this case in November 1990. At that time the panel reserved ruling and invited the parties to submit authority in response to the following question

Whether, if Watt had been charged with some other crime, it would *23have been sufficient to provide a good faith exception to the subsequent search?

Deputy Sheriff Canady of the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Department noticed Appellant driving his motorcycle with his hands not on the handlebars, but folded “Indian-style.” Watt was cited for being in violation of Florida Statutes § 316.2085(3).1 As a result of this traffic stop Watt was subsequently arrested for driving under the influence.

Appellant filed a motion to suppress claiming the traffic violation giving rise to the stop did not take place pursuant to the charging statute. In granting the motion to suppress, Judge Schwartz acknowledged the arresting officer’s theory that the statute required a person riding a motorcycle keep both hands on the handlebars made good sense, and probably was the intent of the legislature, but correctly reasoned that was not how the statute was written. Finding the defendant did not violate the law for which he was stopped, and that the officer didn’t have reasonable suspicion Watt was violating any other law, the motion to suppress was granted.

Noting that Florida’s Rules for Traffic Court, Rules 6.165(b) and 6.455 provide the court may allow the prosecutor to amend, in open court, a traffic citation alleging a criminal traffic offense to state a different traffic offense, the panel posted the aforementioned question to the parties.

(Whether, if Watt had been charged with some other crime, it would have been sufficient to provide a good faith exception to the subsequent search?)

Counsel for appellee responded that the facts of this case do not present a situation where Watt could have been charged with some other crime. The State submits that Watt could have been charged with a violation of Florida Statutes § 316.1925, careless driving.

We commend the trial judge for his careful analysis of the statute and remand to permit the State to amend the offense charged and for determination if, under the facts and circumstances herein, Watt was guilty of careless driving. If, based on the record, the facts prove the commission of the offense of careless driving the stop was valid even if *24it wasn’t the crime originally charged. *See State v Potter,*438 So.2d 1085 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

MOUNTS AND COLBATH, JJ., concur.

1

 No person shall operate a motorcycle or moped while carrying any package, bundle, or other article which prevents him from keeping both hands on the handlebars.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 21


                        SUBSIDIARIES OF PENTON MEDIA INC.



1. Penton Media Limited, a United Kingdom corporation, and its wholly-owned
   subsidiaries:

         1. Independent Exhibitions Limited, a United Kingdom corporation;

         2. Service Exhibitions Limited, a United Kingdom corporation; and

         3. Equity Information Exchange Limited, a United Kingdom corporation.

2. Donohue Meehan Publishing Company, an Illinois corporation.

3. Stardust.com, a California corporation.

4. New Hope International Limited, a United Kingdom corporation.

5. Internet World Media, Inc., a Connecticut corporation, and its wholly-owned
   subsidiaries:

         1. One, Inc., a Colorado corporation;

         2. Boardwatch Magazine, Inc., a Colorado corporation; and

         3. Penton Business Media London Limited, a United Kingdom corporation.

6. Healthwell.com Inc., a Delaware corporation.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 23, 2022

No. 04

- 21

- 00569

- CV

Richard GIBSON and All Other Occupants,

Appellant

v.

Shawn C. BROWN, Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021CV04375

Honorable J Frank Davis , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant’s brief was due on March 11, 2022. Neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time has been filed. Appellant is therefore ORDERED to file, no later than April 4, 2022 , his brief and a written response reasonably explaining: (1) his failu re to timely file a brief, and (2) why appellee is not significantly injured by appellant’s failure to timely file a brief. If appellant fails to timely file a brief and the written response by April 4, 2022 , we will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecut ion. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a); see also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal if appellant fails to comply with court order).

_________________________________ Irene Rios , Justice

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

court on this 23rd day of March, 2022

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
            AS ADDED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of Pacific CMA,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Daisy
Law, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.
1350, as added by ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (a)      The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (b)      The information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in
                  all material respects,  the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company as of and for the period  covered by
                  the Report.


                                    By: /s/Daisy Law
                                        -------------------------------------
                                         Daisy Law, Chief Financial Officer


Date:    August 13, 2004
Exhibit 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                              U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with Annual Report of KeySpan Corporation (the "Corporation")
on Form 10-K for the year ended  December 31, 2002 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Gerald Luterman,
Executive  Vice  President  and  Chief  Financial  Officer  of the  Corporation,
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  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, amended; and

     (2)  The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Corporation.


                                            /s/ Gerald Luterman
                                            -------------------
                                            Name: Gerald Luterman
                                            Title: Executive Vice President and
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            Date: March 6, 2003



Note: A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been provided to KeySpan Corporation and will be retained by KeySpan Corporation
and  furnished  to the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  or its staff upon
request.
At‘ ICPk .:)\ 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

BILL B. BOKMA, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

OP 24-0575 

BOB OLSEN, PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR, 

S.T.A.R.T., 

Respondent. 

RILED 

OCT -2 2024 

Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of Montana 

ORDER 

Bill B. Bokma has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, requesting additional 

credit for jail time and elapsed time. He specifically questions why the Cascade County 

District Court did not give any explanation for additional elapsed time credit while on 

supervision and until the February 7, 2023 Report of Violation. 

This Court secured copies of Bokma's sentencing judgments. In open court on 

October 14, 2021, the Cascade County District Court sentenced Bokma to the DOC for a 

suspended, three-year term "on the condition that the Defendant enter and successfully 

complete the Eighth Judicial District Adult Drug Treatment Court program." It appears 

that the District Court sentenced Bokma, pursuant to § 61-8-741, MCA (2019), which 

allows suspension of a sentence on the contingency of DUI treatment court completion. 

The Montana Legislature repealed this statute in 2021. 2021 Mont. Laws ch. 498, §. 44. 

On July 19, 2023, the District Court held an evidentiary hearing where it revoked Bokma's 

suspended sentence and deemed Bokma's failure to complete adult drug treatment court as 

a non-compliance violation, which does not appear to comport with the definitions found 

in §§ 46-18-203 (10)(b), and 46-23-1001(3), MCA (2021 and 2023). 

Upon review, this Court has three issues that arise with Bokma's sentence upon 

revocation, his request for relief, and the interplay of Montana statutes. First, was Bokma 

10/02/2024

Case Number: OP 24-0575
originally sentenced under § 61-8-741, MCA? Second, how does the repeal of this statute 

affect elapsed time credit? Lastly, is Bokma entitled to the application of the Montana 

Incentives and Interventions Grid (MIIG) prior to revocation? See §46-23-1015, MCA. 

We deem it appropriate to require a response to his Petition as well as the issues that 

the Court raises. Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED that that the Attorney General or counsel for the Department of 

Correction is GRANTED thirty days from the date of this Order in which to prepare, file, 

and serve a written response together with appropriate documentary exhibits. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to Bill 

B. Bokma personally. 61

0 n 

DATED this I— day of October, 2024.
§ 313.1 Purpose, scope, and authority. ( a ) Chapter 77 (Energy Conservation) of Title 42 (The Public Health and Welfare), authorizes and directs certain actions to conserve energy supplies through energy conservation programs and where necessary, the regulation of certain energy uses, and to provide for improved energy efficiency of motor vehicles, major appliances, and certain other consumer products. In furtherance of these purposes, 42 U.S.C. 6362 requires several transportation regulatory agencies, including DOT, to submit a number of reports to the Congress with respect to energy conservation and efficiency, and where practicable and consistent with the exercise of DOT's authority under other law, to include in any major regulatory action a statement of its probable impact on energy efficiency and energy conservation. 42 U.S.C. 6362(b) directs DOT to define the term “major regulatory action” by rule.
( b ) Section 40113 of Subtitle VII of Title 49 of the United States Code (Transportation)(“the Statute”), authorizes DOT to establish such rules, regulations, and procedures as are necessary to the exercise of its functions and are consistent with the purposes of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII.
( c ) The purpose of these regulations is to establish procedures and guidelines for the implementation of DOT's responsibility under 42 U.S.C. 6362 to include in any major regulatory action taken by DOT a statement of the probable impact on energy efficiency and energy conservation.
( d ) These regulations apply to all proceedings before DOT, as provided herein.
[Doc. No. 82, 50 FR 2425, Jan. 16, 1985, as amended at 60 FR 43528, 43529, Aug. 22, 1995, as amended by Doc. No. DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15938, Apr. 16, 2019]
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

                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 on Form 20-F of Amdocs Limited (the
"Company") for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,
Tamar Rapaport-Dagim, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of his knowledge and
belief:

     (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.

Dated: December 3, 2007

/s/ TAMAR RAPAPORT-DAGIM
----------------------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
Amdocs Management Limited
** Federal Advisory Committee Act**

**Printed Annual Reports 1972 - 1998**

Congress eliminated the requirement for the Printed Annual Report in 1999.

| Visitor     
 This site is brought to you by 						 Support Team
Security and Privacy Notice |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
§ 33.55 Teardown inspection. After completing the endurance test— ( a ) Each engine must be completely disassembled;
( b ) Each component having an adjustment setting and a functioning characteristic that can be established independent of installation on the engine must retain each setting and functioning characteristic within the limits that were established and recorded at the beginning of the test; and
( c ) Each engine component must conform to the type design and be eligible for incorporation into an engine for continued operation, in accordance with information submitted in compliance with § 33.4.
[Amdt. 33-6, 39 FR 35466, Oct. 1, 1974, as amended by Amdt. 33-9, 45 FR 60181, Sept. 11, 1980]
### NUMBER 13

- 13

- 00 411

- CV


## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ KB REALTRON MANAGEMENT , A ppellant ,

v.

STEPHANIE DELEON , A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________ On a ppeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 of Travis County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________ 

## ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria Order Per Curiam

On October 9 , 2013, appellant filed a notice of bankruptcy in this appeal.
According to the notice, appellant filed a bankruptcy petition on September 10, 2013 , in
the United States Bankruptcy Court , West ern District.2 Upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition, an automatic stay becomes effective which
prohibits the commencement or continuation of any judicial action or proceeding against
the debtor and any property within the debtor's bankruptcy estate. See 11 U.S.C.A. §
362(a). Pursuant to Rule 8.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the appeal is
suspended. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 8.2.
Accordingly, this appeal is ABATED until further order of this Court. Any
documents filed subsequent to the bankruptcy petition will remain pending until the
appeal is reinstated. The parties are directed to take such action as is appropriate to
advise the Court of any change in the status of the bankruptcy proceeding which would
affect the status of this appeal, including but not limited to, the filing of a motion to
reinstate pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 8.3. See id. 8.3.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 8 th day of November , 20 13

.