alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 4245.7 Successor plan.

The plan sponsor of a successor plan created by a partition order under § 4233.14 of this chapter must issue to participants and beneficiaries any notice required under the partition order and is not required to file or issue notices under § 4245.3 or § 4245.5.

[84 FR 18725, May 2, 2019]
1

The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2440

___________

Gary L. Smith, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Missouri.

Molly Lancaster; Oprah Winfrey; *

Harpo Productions, Inc., * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: June 23, 2006

Filed: June 28, 2006 

___________

Before ARNOLD, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Gary Lee Smith appeals the district court’s1

 orders dismissing Molly Lancaster

and granting summary judgment in favor of Oprah Winfrey and Harpo Productions

in his defamation and copyright-infringement action. After de novo review, see

Kasper v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co., 425 F.3d 496, 502 (8th Cir. 2005) (summary

judgment); Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam)
-2-

(dismissal), we conclude the dismissal and grant of summary judgment were proper.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
### Swanson, Brian (OST)**~-** 

### FFom: 

### Sent:· To: 

### Subject: Devany, Dennis (OST) Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 AM Swanson, Brian (OST) FW: Air Service to Rhinelander, WI

From: Lieberman, Jeri [mailto:Jeri.Lieberman@Staples.com] 

### Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:37 AM 

### To: Devany, Dennis (OST) 

### Subject: Air Service to Rhinelander, WI

Good morning. 

## DOT- 

## 9$T- 2.Dlt-**OlQ~**

Upon reading the proposals ofair serviceto Rhinelander, WI, it appears you may not be looking at continuing the servicefrom Milwaukee, WI to Rhinelander, WI. As a resident ofa suburb of Chicago, IL, it is dissappointing there is no servicevia small jetfrom Chicago to Rhinelander, but at least I have been utilizing, quitefrequently along with many, many others, the service Frontier has been providing from Milwaukee, WI to Rhinelander. I believe you should very seriously consider a Chicago to Rhinelander or at thevery least Milwaukeeto Rhinelander upon review ofyour proposals. I do notfeel routes from Minneapolis to Rhinelander will provide the ridership as the prior mentioned service(s). As the owner and owner-s of.many·homes ofthe Up North Area of Wisconsin continueto increase and the gas price increases, the servicefrom Chicago/Milwaukee will continueto grow. Please reconsider your proposals. ·Thankyou.

1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND THE STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CASH FLOWS FOR
THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,458,062
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     11,957
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         154,033
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        35,936
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,659,988
<COMMON>                                       308,140
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                        (594)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            268,991
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 576,537
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     40,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           545,980
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              55,600
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                       21
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 441,850
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                1,659,988
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      686,430
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            44,670
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     533,216
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     577,886
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        108,544
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               8,305
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 116,849
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        40,007
<NET-INCOME>                                    76,842
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      2,256
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   74,586
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        63,250
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       36,095
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         149,059
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>ALL OUTSTANDING COMMON STOCK OF KENTUCKY UTILITIES COMPANY IS HELD BY ITS
PARENT COMPANY, KU ENERGY CORPORATION.  THEREFORE, EARNINGS PER SHARE IS NOT
APPLICABLE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 24, 2011

t0516 

# Order

May 24, 2011

142613

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142613 COA: 269505 Saginaw CC: 02-021097-FH TOD KEVIN HOUTHOOFD a/k/a TODD 04-024765-FH KEVIN HOUTHOOFD, 05-025865-FH Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e December 2, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 15











Securities and Exchange Commission

450 Fifth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C.  20549



Commissioners:



We are aware that our report dated October 26, 2007 on our review of interim financial statements of LCNB Corp. and Subsidiaries (the "Company"), as of and for the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2007 and 2006 and included in the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter then ended, is incorporated by reference in the Registration Statement of the Company on Form S-8, filed on March 13, 2003.  Pursuant to Rule 436 under the Securities Act of 1933 (the Act), such report is not considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified by an independent registered public accounting firm, or a report prepared or certified by an independent registered public accounting firm within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.







/s/ J.D. Cloud & Co. L.L.P.



J.D. Cloud & Co. L.L.P.





Cincinnati, Ohio

October 26, 2007
#### § 35.24 Designation of responsible employee.

Each recipient shall designate at least one employee to coordinate its compliance activities under the Act and this part, including investigation of any complaints that the recipient receives alleging any actions that are prohibited by the Act or this part.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP00-270-000]

Take notice that on May 5, 2000, Nautilus Pipeline Company, L.L.C. (Nautilus) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, revised tariff sheets listed in Appendix A to the filing, to be effective June 1, 2000.

Nautilus states that the purpose of this filing is to update Nautilus' Original Volume No.1  FERC Gas Tariff to reflect references of Interactive Internet Website.

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 section 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. 00-12229  Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### In the Matter of Wong Wah Yew et al., on Behalf of Themselves and Other Stockholders of Mun Hey Publishing Co., Inc., Respondents, against Mun Hey Publishing Co., Inc., Appellant.

Argued October 5, 1937;

decided October 19, 1937.

*616
      *Joseph K. Guerin*and *Saul S. Myers*for appellant.

*Louis J. Naftalison*and *Joseph A. Sarafite*for respondents.

Orders reversed and motion denied, with costs in all courts, on the ground that the papers show a denial of jurisdictional facts which requires the denial of the motion for a peremptory order of mandamus. (See *Matter of Durr*v. *Paragon Trading Carp.,*270 N. Y. 464.) No opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
Turning 26? What you need to 

know about the Marketplace 

If you’re turning 26 this year and will age off your parent’s health insurance plan, here are 

some different ways to stay covered:

Get health insurance through your job

If you’re working and can get health insurance through your job, you may be able to enroll 

outside its yearly Open Enrollment Period if you lose your parent’s coverage. Contact your 

human resources representative before turning 26 for your next steps.

Get a Marketplace insurance plan

At HealthCare.gov, you’ll find a variety of plans and prices available to you. Depending on 

your situation, you may be eligible for savings based on your income. See if you’ll save at 

HealthCare.gov/lower-costs/.

It’s important to know that if someone will claim you as a tax dependent on next year’s tax 

return, you won’t qualify for savings. You can stay on your parent’s application, but you must 

enroll in your own coverage.
When can you apply? 

• If you’re aging off your parent’s Marketplace plan: You can stay on your parent’s plan 

until coverage ends December 31 even if you turn 26 mid-year. But be sure to apply for a 

Marketplace plan of your own for next year by the Open Enrollment deadline. Your parent 

will also need to update their application to state that you won’t be on their plan next year.

• If you’re aging off your parent’s job-based plan: Your coverage usually ends the month 

you turn 26. Even if it’s outside Open Enrollment, you’ll be able to get a Marketplace plan 

because losing other coverage qualifies you for a Special Enrollment Period. You’ll have 60 

days before you lose coverage and 60 days after that to enroll.

Get Medicaid or Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) coverage

You can apply for Medicaid or CHIP at HealthCare.gov anytime. If you have limited income, 

you could qualify for free or low-cost coverage through Medicaid. If you have children, they 

might qualify for coverage under CHIP — even if you don’t qualify for Medicaid.

When you fill out a Marketplace application, you’ll find out if you qualify for Medicaid and 

CHIP. If you do, coverage can begin immediately.

Questions? Help is available 

• Visit HealthCare.gov/young-adults/ for more information. 

• Find someone in your area to help you at Localhelp.HealthCare.gov. 

• Contact the Marketplace Call Center at 1-800-318-2596. TTY: 1-855-889-4325.

You have the right to get Marketplace information in an accessible format, like large print, Braille, or audio. You also 

have the right to file a complaint if you feel you’ve been discriminated against. Visit CMS.gov/about-cms/agencyinformation/aboutwebsite/cmsnondiscriminationnotice.html, or call the Marketplace Call Center at 1-800-318-2596 

for more information. TTY users can call 1-855-889-4325.

Paid for by the Department of Health & Human Services.

CMS Product No.11921

Revised June 2018
(78 South. 991)

#### TENNESSEE COAL, IRON & R. R. CO. v. GORDEN.

(6 Div. 476.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

April 18, 1918.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; H. A. Sharpe, Judge.

Percy, Benners & Burr, of Birmingham, for appellant. Charles A. Calhoun, of Birmingham, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
EXHIBIT
  32





CERTIFICATION  OF  PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER  AND  PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I,
  Albert H. Pleus, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, that the Quarterly Report on
  Form 10-QSB of a21, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 fully complies
  with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
  of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
  fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
  of operations of a21, Inc.





I,
  Jose Perez, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
  of a21, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements
  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
  contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material
  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of a21, Inc.





By: /s/ Albert H. Pleus


Albert
  H. Pleus  Chairman and Chief Executive Officer  (Principal Executive Officer)





By: /s/ Jose Perez


Jose
  Perez  Vice President of Finance  (Principal Financial Officer)





Date:
  August __, 2004
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1677 

LUIS HERNANDO PEREZ,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A79-101-761)

Submitted: February 24, 2006 Decided: April 25, 2006

Before NIEMEYER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Arturo Hernandez, Vienna, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D.

Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Marleigh D. Dover, Isaac J.

Lidsky, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*Perez does not challenge the immigration judge’s denial of

withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against

Torture. Therefore, these claims are waived. Edwards v. City of

Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Luis Hernando Perez, a native and citizen of Colombia,

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge’s denial

of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection

under the Convention Against Torture.* In his petition for review,

Perez challenges the immigration judge’s determination that he

failed to establish his eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal

of a decision denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show

that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable

factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.”

INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We have

reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Perez fails to

show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Accordingly, we

deny the petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
(77 South. 993)

#### ADDINGTON v. STATE.

(6 Div. 16.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

June 30, 1917.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 13, 1917.)

1. Criminal Law <&wkey;1133 — Abpeal — Rehearins.

An order overruling application for a rehearing is subject to revision by the Court of Appeals during the remainder of the term.

2. False Pretenses <&wkey;49'(6) — Evidence — Sufficiency.

Evidence *held*not to sustain a conviction for obtaining a mortgage by falsely pretending that accused was authorized to, and would; render services as an attorney in return therefor.

Appeal from Criminal. Court, Jefferson County; Wm. E. Fort, Judge.

Upon reconsideration of application for rehearing, judgment of conviction reversed and ease remanded.

For former opinions, see ante, p. 10, 74 South. 846; 200 Ala. 414, 76 South. 6.

Certiorari denied 201 Ala. 331, 77 South. 993.

Gibson *&*Davis, Gaston *&*Drennen, and H. K. White, all of Birmingham, for appellant. W. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., and Harwell G. Davis, Asst. Atty, Gen., for the State.

PER CURIAM.

[1] The defendant’s application for rehe.ariñg was overruled by this court on October ,19, .1916, during the first month of' the preseht term, and that order is still in the breast of the court and subject to the control of the court. Minto v. State, 9 Ala. App. 95, 64 South. 369; Ex parte Minto, 187 Ala. 671, 65 South. 516; Ex parte Adams, 187 Ala. 10, 65 South. 514.

(2j This court,-in view of the suggestion in the opinion of, Justiqe, Sayre, of the Supreme Court, concurred in 'by' Justice Thomas', (Ex parte Addington, 76 South. 62), has le-examiiied the facts as presented by the record in this case, which are set out in the opinions heretofore promulgated by Judge Brown, and reported in 74 South. 846-861,3 and all concur that the evidence was not sufficient to warrant the defendant’s conviction, and that the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial. The order overruling the defendant’s application is therefore set aside and vacated, the application is granted, the judgment of affirmance is set aside, and the judgment of the criminal court is reversed and remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

2

200 Ala. 414.

3

 Ante, p. 10.
§ 452.110 Adequate safeguards. ( a ) In addition to the election safeguards discussed in this part, the Act contains a general mandate in section 401(c), that adequate safeguards to insure a fair election shall be provided. Such safeguards are not required to be included in the union's constitution and bylaws, but they must be observed. A labor organization's wide range of discretion regarding the conduct of elections is thus circumscribed by a general rule of fairness. For example, if one candidate is permitted to have his nickname appear on the ballot, his opponent should enjoy the same privilege.
( b ) A union's failure to provide voters with adequate instructions for properly casting their ballots may violate the requirement of adequate safeguards to insure a fair election.
§ 4233.13 Coordinated application process for partition and benefit suspension. ( a ) *Interagency coordination.* For a plan sponsor that has requested a conditional approval of a partition pursuant to § 4233.12(c), PBGC may render either a conditional approval or a final denial of the application on an expedited basis, provided that the plan sponsor has submitted a completed application to PBGC as prescribed by § 4233.10. PBGC will consult with Treasury and the Department of Labor in the course of reviewing an application for partition. ( 1 ) If PBGC denies the application for partition, it will notify the plan sponsor in writing of PBGC's decision in accordance with § 4233.12(b), and will notify Treasury to allow it to take appropriate action on the benefit suspension application.
( 2 ) If PBGC grants a conditional approval of partition, it will notify the plan sponsor in writing of PBGC's decision in accordance with § 4233.12(c), and will provide Treasury with a copy of PBGC's decision along with PBGC's record of the decision.
( 3 ) If Treasury does not issue the final authorization to suspend, PBGC's conditional approval under § 4233.12(c) will be null and void.
( 4 ) If Treasury issues a final authorization to suspend, PBGC will issue a final partition order under § 4233.14 and section 4233(c) of ERISA. The effective date of a final partition order must satisfy the requirements of section 305(e)(9)(D)(v) of ERISA.
( b ) *Combined notice.* A plan sponsor submitting an application for benefit suspensions under section 305(e)(9) of ERISA with Treasury, and a partition under section 4233 of ERISA with PBGC, may combine the PBGC model notice for coordinated applications provided at Appendix A with the Treasury model notice in Appendix A of Rev. Proc. 2015-34 in satisfaction of the notice requirement of this part.
[80 FR 35229, June 19, 2015, as amended at 80 FR 79695, Dec. 23, 2015]