alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 4905.4 Appearances by PBGC employees. ( a ) Whenever a PBGC employee or former employee is requested or served with compulsory process to appear in a proceeding to which this part applies, he or she will promptly notify the General Counsel.
( b ) The General Counsel or his or her designee will authorize an appearance by a PBGC employee or former employee if, and to the extent, he or she determines that such appearance is in the interest of the PBGC. ( 1 ) In determining whether an appearance is in the interest of the PBGC, the General Counsel or his or her designee will consider relevant factors, including: ( i ) What, if any, objective of the PBGC (and, where relevant, any federal agency, if the United States is a party) would be promoted by the appearance;
( ii ) Whether the appearance would unnecessarily interfere with the employee's official duties;
( iii ) Whether the appearance would result in the appearance of improperly favoring one litigant over another; and
( iv ) Whether the appearance is appropriate under applicable substantive and procedural rules.
( 2 ) If the General Counsel or his or her designee concludes that compulsory process is essentially a request for PBGC record information, it will be treated as a request under the Freedom of Information Act, as amended, in accordance with part 4901 of this chapter, except to the extent that the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, and part 4902 of this chapter govern disclosure of a record maintained on an individual.
( c ) If, in response to compulsory process in a proceeding to which this part applies, the General Counsel or his or her designee has not authorized an appearance by the return date, the employee or former employee shall appear at the stated time and place (unless advised by the General Counsel or his or her designee that process either was not validly issued or served or has been withdrawn), accompanied by a PBGC attorney, produce a copy of this part of the regulations, and respectfully decline to provide any testimony or produce any documents or other material. When the demand is under consideration, the employee shall respectfully request that the court or other authority stay the demand pending the employee's receipt of instructions from the General Counsel.
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

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Psychiatric and Physiological Domains in Mental Diseases.                    

*Date:*                         September 15-16, 2011.                    

*Time:*                         3 p.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Pier 5 Hotel, 711 Eastern Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21202.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Boris P Sokolov, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5217A, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-408-9115,                         *bsokolov@csr.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: August 5, 2011.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2011-20532 Filed 8-11-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
1 

No. 04-15-00035-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 

__________________________________ 

Ark Dimension 4, Inc. and Robert Pospisil, 

Appellants 

v.

Michelle Griffith, Personal Representative of the Estate of Del O. Amy, Deceased,

 Appellee 

___________________________________ 

Appealed from 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 12575A 

Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding 

___________________________________ 

MOTION TO EXTEND ABATEMENT OF APPEAL 

PENDING FINALIZATION OF SETTLEMENT

___________________________________ 

 Appellants, Ark Dimension 4, Inc. and Robert Pospisil, file this Motion to Extend Abatement 

of Appeal Pending Finalization of Settlement, and respectfully show as follows: 

1. The parties have recently entered into a tentative agreement to fully and finally settle 

the lawsuit giving rise to this Appeal. The settlement will be finalized upon the closing of a real estate 

transaction which, as of the filing of this Motion, has not occurred. Appellees are not parties to the 

transaction in question but have been informed that closing should occur within the next thirty days. 

The Court has previously abated the appeal pending finalization of the settlement. 

2. The parties expect that the settlement of this case will be finalized in approximately 30 

to 60 days, at which time they will file a joint motion to dismiss this Appeal. 

3. For the foregoing reasons, the parties request the Court to extend the abatement in 

this Appeal pending finalization of the settlement. 

ACCEPTED

04-15-00035-CV

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

7/23/2015 4:17:05 PM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 07/23/2015 4:17:05 PM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
2

WHEREFORE, Appellants and Appellee request this Court to extend the abatement of all 

deadlines in this Appeal pending finalization of the settlement and for such other relief to which they 

may be entitled.

Respectfully submitted, 

BAYNE, SNELL & KRAUSE

1250 N.E. Loop 410, Suite 725

San Antonio, Texas 78209

Telephone: (210) 824-3278

Telecopier: (210) 824-3937

Email: dsnell@bsklaw.com

By: /S/

David C. “Clay” Snell 

State Bar No. 24011309

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANTS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served upon Genevieve 

Klein Gold, The Nevins Law Firm, 206 W. Main Street, Fredericksburg, Texas 78624, on this the 23rd 

day of July, 2015.

 /S/

David C. "Clay" Snell
FAA Home
Airports
Resources
Series 150 Advisory Circulars (ACs) for Airport Projects

# AC 150/5220-10D - Guide Specification for Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Vehicles (Cancelled)

- ShareShare
- 

- Facebook					Share on Facebook
- Twitter					Tweet on Twitter

## Document Information

- Number
- 150/5220-10D
- Title
- Guide Specification for Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Vehicles
- Date cancelled
- 2011-05-31
- Cancellation notes
- 150/5220-10E
- Date issued
- 2007-09-24
- Office of Primary Responsibility
- AAS-100, Office of Airport Safety & Standards - Airport Engineering Division 
- Description
-  	Contains information, references, and guidelines for a family of aircraft rescue and fire fighting (ARFF) vehicles. Vehicles meeting this standard satisfy Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139, Certification of Airports, and meet the requirements for airport response to aircraft fire fighting.	This AC cancels AC 150/5220-19, Guide Specification for Small, Dual Agent Aircraft Rescue, and Firefighting Vehicles (December 7, 1993).	This AC incorporates NFPA 414.0 (2007 edition) by reference, with noted additions, exceptions, and amendments. The AC should be read in conjunction with the NFPA Standards. To access the NFPA Standards, visit www.nfpa.org. 
- Content
-    -  150/5220-10D  (PDF) 
  -  150/5220-10D  (MS Word) 
  -  Responses to Industry Comments on AC 150/5220-10D  (PDF) 
  -  Errata Sheet for 150/5220-10D (January 22, 2009)  (PDF) 
- Cancels
-  CancelsNumberTitleDate150/5220-10CGuide Specification for Water/Foam Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Vehicles												Contains performance standards, specifications, and recommendations for the design, construction, and testing of a family of aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF) vehicles. 											2002-02-18 

## View All

      - Current Series 150 ACs
      - Cancelled Series 150 ACs
      - Draft Series 150 ACs
      - Advisory Circulars

## Export All

      - Current Series 150 ACs  (CSV)
      - Cancelled Series 150 ACs  (CSV)

## Top Requests

      - AC 150/5300-13B, Airport Design
      - AC 150/5320-6G, Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation
      - AC 150/5370-10H, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports
      - AC 150/5340-1M, Standards for Airport Markings
      - AC 150/5340-30J, Design and Installation Details for Airport Visual Aids
      - AC 150/5390-2C, Heliport Design
**JUL**
               OCT
				**MAY**13**2007**
               2008
				**2010****38 captures**
           25 Feb 05 - 10 Nov 12
   Close
       Help


Mark Twain National Wildlife Refuge
 Midwest Region
 Who We AreFact SheetHistoryContact Us
What We Do
**Wild Things**
BirdsFish and MusselsMammalsReptiles and AmphibiansInvasive Species
Public Use
Maps
Mark Twain NWR Complex
Port Louisa NWRGreat River/Clarence Cannon NWRTwo Rivers NWR
  Middle Mississippi River NWR
Site Map
Small Wetlands Program
Duck Stamp photo
2008 Federal Duck Stamp Contest
Links
Phone: 217-224-8580 
V/TTY: 800-526-0844
  Address: 
  1704 North 24th Street  
  Quincy, IL 62301 Map of the Mark Twain Refuge Complex
 
 Who We Are What We Do Wild Things Public Use Maps   Mark Twain NWR Complex Site Map Links Home
 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Home Page Department of the Interior USA.gov About the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Accessibility Privacy Notices Disclaimer FOIA
 Find Office By ProgramAdministrationEcological ServicesExternal AffairsFisheriesLaw EnforcementMigratory BirdsRefugesState Programs
**Exhibit 15.1**

 

 

 

April 30, 2007

 

 

Alexander’s, Inc.

Paramus, New Jersey

 

We have reviewed, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financial information of Alexander’s, Inc. and subsidiaries for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, as indicated in our report dated April 30, 2007; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

 

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, is incorporated by reference in Amendment No. 3 to Registration Statement No. 33-62779 on Form S-3.

 

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Parsippany, New Jersey
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

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 of First Ottawa Bancshares, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) for the periodending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Vincent G. Easi, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/Vincent  G. Easi      |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
|                     |
|                     |
| Vincent  G. Easi         |
| Chief  Financial Officer |
| July 7,  2005       |

 

1

----
§ 138.10 Scope and purpose. ( a ) *Scope.* This subpart sets forth— ( 1 ) The requirements and procedures each COFR Operator (as defined in § 138.30(b)) must use to establish and maintain the evidence of financial responsibility required by the OPA 90 and CERCLA (both defined in § 138.30), and to obtain Certificates of Financial Responsibility (COFR);
( 2 ) The standards and procedures the Coast Guard uses to determine the acceptability of guarantors;
( 3 ) The procedures guarantors must use to submit evidence of financial responsibility on behalf of the responsible parties for vessels to which this subpart applies;
( 4 ) The requirements for designating and maintaining U.S. agents for service of process;
( 5 ) The requirements for reporting changes affecting compliance with this subpart; and
( 6 ) The enforcement actions that may result from non-compliance with this subpart or OPA 90, CERCLA, or both, referenced in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( b ) *Purpose.* These requirements ensure that the responsible parties for vessels to which this subpart applies, have sufficient available financial resources to cover their potential liabilities to the United States and other claimants in the following scenarios: ( 1 ) Under OPA 90 in the event of a discharge, or substantial threat of a discharge, of oil; and
( 2 ) In the case of vessels greater than 300 gross tons, under CERCLA in the event of a release, or threatened release, of a hazardous substance.
NO. 07-04-0313-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TE XAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL D MARCH 16, 2005

______________________________ SHERYL D. ATWOOD,

Appellant
v. THE STA

TE OF TEX

AS, Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF LUBBOCK COUNTY; NO. 2002-478,973; HON. DRUE FARMER, PRESIDING

_______________________________ ABATEMENT AND RE MAND

_______________________________ Before QUINN, REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ. Appellant

Sheryl D. Atwood appeals from a judgment convicting her of driving while intoxicated. Appellant’s brief is due in this cau se. Two extensi ons of ti me to file the brief were granted, and a third extension of the applicable dea dline was sought by appellant’s counsel. Counsel represented that due to his workload and the reporter’s record being misplaced, he was d evoting “the remai nder of th is week . . . to pre paration of the br ief, which will becomplete d by Frid ay, March 11, 2005 .” To date, n o brief has been filed on behalf of appell ant.2

Accordingly, we now a bate this appeal and remand th e cause to the Cou nty Court atLaw No. 2 of Lubb ock Coun ty(trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall immediately cause notice of a he aring to be given and, thereafte r, conduc t a hearing to determi ne the fo llowing : 1. whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal ; 2. whether appellant has been denied the effec tive assis tance of counsel due to appellate counsel’s failureto timely file an appella te brief. See Evitts v. Lucey , 46 9 U.S. 387, 394, 105 S. Ct. 830, 834-35, 83 L. Ed.2d 821 , 828 (1985) (holding that an indigent defendant is en titled to the effective assistance of counsel on the first appeal as of right and that counsel must be availab le to ass ist in pr eparing and submi tting an appella te brief). We further

direct the trial court to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing the foregoing subjects. Should the trial court find tha t appell ant desires to pursue this appeal, is indigent, has appointed counsel , and has been denied effective assistance of counsel, or has no counsel, then we further direct it to appoint new counsel to assist in the prosecution of the appeal. The name, address, phone number, telefax number, and state bar number of the new counsel, if any, who will represent appellant on appeal must also be incl uded in the court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. Furthermore, the trial court shall also c ause to be developed 1) a supplemental cl erk’s record containing the findings of fact and conclusions of law and 2) a reporter’s record transcribing the evidence and argument presented at the aforementioned hearing. Additionally, the trial court shall
cause the supplemental cler k’s reco rd to be f iled wi th the cl erk of thi s court on or before April 15, 200 5. Shou ld addit ional ti me be nee ded to pe rform these tasks, th e trial court may request same on or before April 15, 2005. It is so ordered. Per Curiam Do not publish.
OMB NO. 0985-0009 

Expires: xx/xx/20xx 

Certification of Maintenance of Effort

CERTIFICATION OF STATE RESOURCES EXPENDED, UNDER TITLE III OF 

THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT OF 1965, AS AMENDED, TO MEET THE 

REQUIRED LEVEL OF MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT DURING FISCAL YEAR

STATE:

I, the undersigned, certify that the State resources expended to 

meet the maintenance of effort requirement set forth by Title 

III of the Older Americans Act, under the approved State plan, 

for the period of October 1, 

were $ . 

through September 30, 

This amount is (check one): 

Less than the required level of maintenance of effort 

Equal to the required level of maintenance of effort 

More than the required level of maintenance of effort 

Signature of Authorized State Official 

Date

Public Burden Statement: 

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such 

collection displays a valid OMB control number (OMB 0985-000). Public reporting burden for this collection of information is 

estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including time for gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and 

reviewing the collection of information.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20548 Conference Calendar

JOSEPH EUGENE JACKSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus MARY WARD, Captain, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CA H 96-900

- - - - - - - - - - April 17, 1997 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Texas state prisoner Joseph Eugene Jackson, No. 673561, appeals the dismissal with prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as duplicative of a previous civil rights action. This Court GRANTS him leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. Jackson’s claims and the surrounding facts are the same as those he raised in his previous suit. The district court did notNo. 96-20548 - 2 - abuse its discretion in finding Jackson’s complaint in this case to be duplicative and in dismissing it under § 1915. See Wilson v. Lynaugh , 878 F.2d 846, 850 (5th Cir.), cert
. denied , 493 U.S. 969 (1989); see also Graves v. Hampton , 1 F.3d 315, 318 (5th Cir. 1993)). We DISMISS Jackson’s appeal of his duplicative lawsuit as without arguable merit and frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Jackson’s motion to subpoena documentary evidence is also DENIED as frivolous. We caution Jackson that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Jackson is further cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous. Jackson’s current zero balance leaves him unable to pay the initial partial filing fee required by an IFP appellant. However, Jackson is still responsible for payment of the full amount of the filing fee. He shall make monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to his account towards full payment of the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody of Jackson is directed to forward payments from his account to the clerk of the district court each time the amount in his account exceeds $10 until the filing fee is paid. See id

. IFP GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; MOTION DENIED ASNo. 96-20548 - 3 - FRIVOLOUS; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED; FEE ASSESSED.
Copyright Information

Data In ftgures, except for some maps In chapters 1 and 7 where specific

source is given, are Inthepublic domain and may be used and reprinted

without special permission: citation as to source, however, is appreciated

Suggested Citation

Van Nostrand JF, ed. Common bellefs about the rural elderly: What do natmna

data tell us? National Center for Health Statistics. V/tal Health Stat 3(28). 1993

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Common bel(efs about the rural elderly : what donatlonal data tell us?

p. cm. – (Vital and health statlatics Series 3, Analykal and

epidemiologtcal studies ; no,28) (DHHS publication : no. (PHS) 93-1412)

Edited by Joan F, Van Nostrand.

ISBN 0-8406-0477-7

1. Rural aged–United States–Social condlt[ons–Statistics, 2, Rurai

aged–Medical care–United States–Statistics. 3. Rural aged–United

States –Economic conditions –Statistics. 1, Van Nostrand, Joan F, II National

Center for Health Statistics (U. S.) Ill. Series. IV. Series: DHHS publication no

(PHS) 93-1412. HQ1064.IJ5C536 1993

305.26’0973’021 – dc20 93-3076

CIP

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office

Superintendent of Documents

Mad Stop: SSOP

Washington, DC 20402-9328