alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 113 (Monday, June 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 36884]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14757]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Advisory Committee on Women Veterans, Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs gives notice under Public Law 
92-463 that a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Women Veterans 
(Committee) will be held on June 26-27, 2000, at the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW, Room 230, Washington, DC. On 
June 26, the meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. and adjourn at 5:00 p.m. 
On June 26, the meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. and adjourn at 5:00 
p.m. On June 27, the meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. and adjourn at 12 
noon.
    The purpose of the Committee is to advise the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs regarding the needs of women veterans with respect to health 
care, rehabilitation, compensation, outreach, and other programs and 
activities administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs designed 
to meet such needs. The Committee will make recommendations to the 
Secretary regarding such activities.
    Both days of the meeting will be to discuss the proceedings of the 
National Summit on Women Veterans Issues, scheduled on June 23-25, 
2000, in preparation of the Committee's annual report. All sessions 
will be open to the public.
    Those who plan to attend should contact Ms. Maryanne Carson, 
Department of Veterans Affairs, Center for Women Veterans, 810 Vermont 
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20420 at (202) 273-6193.

    Dated: June 5, 2000.

    By Direction of the Secretary.
Marvin R. Eason,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-14757 Filed 6-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
----

| Subsidiary Name                                      |   | Jurisdiction of Incorporation |
|------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
| Lenco Media Inc.                                     |   | Nevada                        |
| Lenco Multimedia Inc.                                |   | Nevada                        |
| Lenco International Ltd.                             |   | British Virgin Islands        |
| Lenco Mobile USA Inc.                                |   | Nevada                        |
| Lenco Technology Group Ltd.                          |   | British Virgin Islands        |
| Lenco Mobile Asia Pte Ltd.                           |   | Singapore                     |
| Lenco Mobile UK Ltd.                                 |   | United Kingdom                |
| Capital Supreme (Pty) Ltd., dba Multimedia Solutions |   | South African                 |
| Lenco Mobile Singapore Pte Ltd.                      |   | Singapore                     |
| Lenco Mobile Colombia SAS                            |   | Colombia                      |
| Soluciones de Buro Moviles SA de CV                  |   | Mexico                        |
###### Editorial Note on Part 67

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 67 appear by USCG-2001-10714, 69 FR 24983, 24984, May 5, 2004.

#### § 67.40-25 Penalty.

The penalty for violation is in section 1, 63 Stat. 501 (14 U.S.C. 544), or section 4(e)(2) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1333). Any person, firm, company, or corporation who shall fail or refuse to obey any of the lawful rules and regulations issued in this part or pursuant thereto shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than $100 for each offense. Each day during which such violation shall continue shall be considered a new offense.

[CGFR 58-17, 23 FR 3377, May 20, 1958, as amended by USCG-2020-0304, 85 FR 58277, Sept. 18, 2020]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT PIERCE DIVISION

CASE NO.: 9:22-cv-81576

VPR BRANDS, LP,

Plaintiff,

v.

SHENZHEN WEIBOLI TECHNOLOGY CO. 

LTD. (ELF BAR), YLSN DISTRIBUTION 

LLC, SAFA GOODS LLC, UNISHOW 

(U.S.A.), INC., SV3 LLC, KINGDOM 

VAPOR INC., ECTO WORLD LLC, D&A 

DISTRIBUTION LLC, TAHER SHRITEH, 

HAITHAM SHRITEH, AHMED SHRITEH, 

AND ORANGE WHOLESALE, LLC,

Defendants and Non-Parties.

JOINT NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Plaintiff VPR BRANDS, LP and Defendant SAFA GOODS LLC and Non-Parties

TAHER SHRITEH, HAITHAM SHRITEH, AHMED SHRITEH, AND ORANGE 

WHOLESALE, LLC, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Local Rule 

16.2.F of the Southern District of Florida, hereby notify the Court that the parties have reached a 

settlement and request until May 21, 2023 in which to file a Stipulation of Dismissal of 

Defendant SAFA GOODS LLC ONLY. 

Dated: April 21, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Joel B. Rothman

JOEL B. ROTHMAN

Florida Bar Number: 98220

joel.rothman@sriplaw.com

LAYLA T. NGUYEN

/s/ Gregory S. Weiss

GREGORY S. WEISS

Florida Bar Number: 163430

Gweiss@mrachek-law.com

Case 9:22-cv-81576-AMC Document 141 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/21/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

Florida Bar Number: 1024723

layla.nguyen@sriplaw.com

SRIPLAW, P.A.

21301 Powerline Road

Suite 100

Boca Raton, FL 33433

561.404.4350 – Telephone

561.404.4353 – Facsimile

Counsel for Plaintiff Vpr Brands, Lp

MRACHEK, FITZGERALD, ROS, KONOPKA,

THOMAS & WEISS, P.A.

505 South Flagler Drive

Suite 600

West Palm Beach, FL 33401

561.655.2250 - Telephone 

561.655.5537 - Facsimile 

Counsel for Defendant Safa Goods LLC and 

Non-Parties Taher Shriteh, Haitham Shriteh, 

Ahmed Shriteh, and Orange Wholesale, LLC

Case 9:22-cv-81576-AMC Document 141 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/21/2023 Page 2 of 2
#### TERENCE P. SMITH, Respondent, *v.*THE MAYOR, Etc., OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant.

1869, *chap.*876, § 11 — *“ puMio officw'.”*

Appeal from an- order overruling a demurrer to the complaint.

Respondent was appointed messenger to the president of the board of aldermen, on the 1st day of January, 1869, and performed the duties of said messenger until the 6th day of June, 1870.

On the 23d day of October, 1869, his salary wás increased from $1,500 to $2,500 per annum. Appellant refused to pay the difference between the original salary and the increased salary, and this action is brought to recover such increase.

Appellant demurred to the complaint, and the demurrer was Overruled, and judgment ordered for plaintiff.

The position taken by- appellant was that the increase was in violation of section 11, chapter 876 of the Laws of 1869, passed May 12, 1869, which provides as follows: “ The common council of the city of New York are hereby prohibited from .creating any new office or department, or increasing the salaries of those now in office, or their successors, except as provided by acts passed by the legislature.” The court at General Term *held,*that a messenger to the president of the board of aldermen in New York, was not a public officer within the. meaning of section 11 of chapter 876 of 1869.

*645
      *Collins*v. *The*Mayor, *etc.*(10 S. C., 680), in which case it was held that the plaintiff was an officer, was distinguished because the office of his principal was one created by law, and its duties were official, and his deputy or assistant clerk was appointed to perform some portion of the official functions of the clerk himself. But a “ messenger to the president of the board of aldermen ” could not be supposed to perform the official functions of the president. He serves him in no official capacity in carrying messages and running errands, and is clothed with no power to perform any official duty of that office.

*D. J.*Dean, for the appellant.

*C. E.*Miller, for the respondent.

Opinion by

Davis, P. J.

Daniels and Brady, JJ., concurred.

Order affirmed with costs, and with leave to defendants to answer on payment of costs.
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5064

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow employees and selfemployed individuals to deduct taxes paid for social security and medicare.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 27, 2000

Mr. MCCRERY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow employees and self-employed individuals to deduct taxes

paid for Social Security and Medicare.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. DEDUCTION ALLOWED FOR TAXES PAID BY EM4 PLOYEES UNDER THE FEDERAL INSURANCE

5 CONTRIBUTIONS ACT AND ANALOGOUS

6 TAXES UNDER THE RAILROAD RETIREMENT

7 TAX ACT.

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (f) of section 164 of

9 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to deduction
2

•HR 5064 IH

1 for one-half of self-employment taxes) is amended to read

2 as follows:

3 ‘‘(f) DEDUCTION FOR TAXES PAID BY EMPLOYEES

4 AND SELF-EMPLOYED INDIVIDUALS.—In the case of an

5 individual, in addition to the taxes described in subsection

6 (a), there shall be allowed as a deduction for the taxable

7 year an amount equal to—

8 ‘‘(1) the taxes imposed by section 3101 (relat9 ing to tax on employees under the Federal Insurance

10 Contributions Act) and the taxes imposed by sec11 tions 3201(a) and 3211(a)(1) (relating to the taxes

12 on railroad employees and railroad employee rep13 resentatives) for such taxable year, and

14 ‘‘(2) in the case of a self-employed individual

15 (within the meaning of section 401(c)), the taxes im16 posed by section 1401 for such taxable year.

17 For purposes of this chapter, one-half of the deduction

18 allowed by paragraph (2) shall be treated as attributable

19 to a trade or business carried on by the taxpayer which

20 does not consist of the performance of services by the tax21 payer as an employee.’’.

22 (b) DEDUCTION ALLOWED WHETHER OR NOT TAX23 PAYER ITEMIZES OTHER DEDUCTIONS.—Subsection (a)

24 of section 62 of such Code is amended by inserting after

25 paragraph (17) the following new paragraph:
3

•HR 5064 IH

1 ‘‘(18) SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE

2 TAXES.—The deduction allowed by section 164(f).’’.

3 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Paragraph (1) of

4 section 275(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (re5 lating to certain taxes not deductible) is amended to read

6 as follows:

7 ‘‘(1) Federal income taxes, including—

8 ‘‘(A) the taxes imposed by sections

9 3201(b) and 3211(a)(2) (relating to the taxes

10 on railroad employees and railroad employee

11 representatives); and

12 ‘‘(B) the tax withheld at source on wages

13 under section 3402.’’

14 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

15 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

16 December 31, 2000.

Æ
EXHIBIT
      32.1


**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 Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 of AMERCO
      and U-Haul International, Inc. (together, the “Company”), as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on November 8, 2006 (the “Report”), I, Edward
      J. Shoen, Chairman of the Board and President of the Company, certify, 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.







AMERCO,


a
      Nevada
      corporation


/s/
      Edward J. Shoen


Edward
      J.
      Shoen


President
      and Chairman of the Board


Date:
      November 8, 2006








U-HAUL
      INTERNATIONAL, INC.,


a
      Nevada
      corporation




/s/ Edward J. Shoen


Edward
      J.
      Shoen


President
      and Chairman of the Board


Date:
      November 8, 2006
On appellant’s motion for reconsideration filed January 9,

reconsideration allowed; decision (131 Or App 363, 884 P2d 1231) withdrawn; affirmed February 22, 1995

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*WILLIAM EDGAR FENNERN, *Appellant.*

(93-800; CA A81885)

891 P2d 2

Richard L. Wolf for motion.

Before Riggs, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Leeson, Judges.

De MUNIZ, J.

*201De MUNIZ, J.

We affirmed without opinion defendant’s appeal from the sentence imposed after he pled guilty to five counts of sodomy in the third degree pursuant to a plea agreement that did not include an agreement as to the imposition of sentence. 131 Or App 363, 884 P2d 1231 (1994). We allow defendant’s motion for reconsideration, *State v. Kephart,*320 Or 433, 887 P2d 774 (1994), withdraw our decision and, on reconsideration, affirm.

Defendant challenges the departure sentence imposed on his conviction on Count VII. The court found aggravating factors of permanent injury to the victim, OAR 253-08-002(2)(b)(I), and that the degree of harm or loss was significantly greater than is typical for such an offense. OAR 253-08-002(2)(b)(J). Defendant contends that the court did not give reasons to support its conclusions as to why the two factors apply and, additionally, that OAR 253-08-002(b)(J) is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.

 The victim is a minor male. Defendant argues that the only substantiation for permanent injury is the victim’s statement that he views everyone he now meets as gay or lesbian. Defendant contends that there is nothing in the record to support the conclusion that the victim’s outlook will be permanent and that such a conclusion must be based on more than an inference. Defendant gives no authority for that proposition. The guidelines do not preclude a sentencing court from drawing inferences based on the evidence before it. Here, the trial court relied on “statements in the presentence investigation which clearly indicate [the victim’s] entire attitude towards adults has been changed as a result of this.” Evidence from the victim, the victim’s mother and the presentence investigation report support the court’s finding of permanent injury.

Because we conclude that the court did not err in relying on the aggravating factor of permanent injury, we need not address defendant’s arguments regarding OAR 253-08-002(2)(b)(J). The trial court specifically held that either factor would support the departure sentence it imposed. Consequently, there is no sentencing error that *202requires remand. *State v. Williams,*133 Or App 191, 891 P2d 3 (1995).

Reconsideration allowed; decision withdrawn; affirmed.
Argued and submitted February 10,

affirmed April 26, 1995

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Appellant, v.*JACK E. JOHNS, *Respondent.*

(93-06-164 CR; CA A83771)

894 P2d 1218

Kaye E. Sunderland, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Mike Kilpatrick argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Kilpatricks.

Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Armstrong, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*203PER CURIAM

In this appeal, the state contends that “[t]he trial court erred in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss [an] amended information.” We affirm.

On January 13, 1993, defendant received citations for illegal possession of a game mammal, illegal taking of a game mammal without a valid tag, ORS 498.002, and loaning an elk tag to another, ORS 497.400. Later, after numerous proceedings in justice court, the district attorney elected to charge those offenses as misdemeanors and filed an information in circuit court. However, because the information did not allege that defendant had a culpable mental state, it in fact charged defendant with violations. ORS 496.992(2). Defendant moved to dismiss on several grounds.

On January 24, 1994, the state moved to file an amended information, which alleged that defendant had a culpable mental state. The trial court did not explicitly rule on that motion, and on January 25,1994, it granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the original information.

The state does not assign error to the dismissal of the first information or to the trial court’s disposition of the state’s motion to file an amended information. Instead, it assigns error to the dismissal of an amended information that was never filed and on which the trial court never made a ruling. Thus, the state asks for review of an order that was never entered.

Affirmed.
The State of /s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 31, 2015

No. 04-15-00470-CR

David MEDRANO,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR4205

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The trial court’s certification states that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has 

NO right of appeal.” We therefore ORDER the trial court clerk to file, within ten days of the date 

of this order, an electronic clerk’s record containing the following documents:

1. All pre-trial motions and the orders on those motions, if any;

2. all documents relating to the defendant’s plea bargain, including the 

court’s admonishments, the defendant’s waiver and consent to stipulation 

of testimony, and any other stipulations;

3. the judgment;

4. all post-judgment motions and the orders on those motions, if any;

5. the notice(s) of appeal;

6. the trial court’s certification of defendant’s right of appeal; 

7. the criminal docket sheet; and

8. the bill of costs.
All other appellate deadlines are suspended pending further order of this court. The clerk of this 

court is ORDERED to send a copy of this order to the attorneys of record, the trial court clerk, 

and the court reporter responsible for preparing the reporter’s record in this appeal.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

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

court on this 31st day of July, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
§ 3041.515 Extensions. ( a ) A negotiated service agreement may be extended prior to its expiration date upon one of the following: ( 1 ) Timely filing of notice with the Commission of the valid exercise of an extension right in the negotiated service agreement; or
( 2 ) Approval by the Commission of a timely filed amendment extending the expiration date of the negotiated service agreement.
( b ) For the purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, a notice or amendment is timely filed if it is filed at least 7 days prior to the expiration of the negotiated service agreement.
( c ) Upon expiration, a negotiated service agreement shall be removed automatically from the competitive product list.
( d ) No negotiated service agreement shall remain on the competitive product list following its expiration. An expired negotiated service agreement shall not be extended retroactively.
( e ) Notwithstanding any other rule in this chapter, the prohibitions in paragraph (d) of this section shall not be waived.
Catfish Processing Agricultural Statistics Board

June 1999 2 NASS, USDA

Catfish Processing Agricultural Statistics Board

June 1999 4 NASS, USDA

The next “Catfish Processing ” report will be released at 3:00 p.m. ET on July 23, 1999.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on

the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and

marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
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 Emergency Management Agency

          - [FEMA-1326-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the State of Maine, (FEMA-1326-DR), dated April 28, 2000, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

June 2, 2000. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Madge Dale, Response and Recovery Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3772. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster for the State of Maine is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of April 28, 2000: 

Washington County for Public Assistance. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)

Bruce Baughman,

Division Director, Operations and Planning Division.

[FR Doc. 00-14659 Filed 6-8-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 112 (Friday, June 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 36680]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14569]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP000-308-000]


ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

June 5, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 31, 2000, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) 
tendered for filing, as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised 
Volume No. 1, Third Revised Sheet No. 45E.1 to be effective July 1, 
2000.
    ANR states that the purpose of this filing is to designate in its 
tariff a new point eligible for service under its existing Rate 
Schedule IPLS.
    ANR states that copies of the filing have been mailed to all 
affected customers and state regulatory commissions.
    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. 00-14569 Filed 6-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M