alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 113 (Monday, June 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 36890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14756]


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

COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS


Notice of Meeting

    The next meeting of the Commission of Fine Arts is schedule for 
June 15, 2000, at 10 a.m. in the Commission's offices at the National 
Building Museum (Pension Building), Suite 312, Judiciary Square, 441 F 
Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20001-2728. Items of discussion will 
include designs for projects affecting the appearance of Washington, 
D.C., including buildings and parks.
    Inquiries regarding the agenda and request to submit written or 
oral statements should be addressed to Charles H. Atherton, Secretary, 
Commission of Fine Arts, at the above address or call 202-504-2200. 
Individuals requiring sign language interpretation for the hearing 
impaired should contact the Secretary at least 10 days before the 
meeting date.

    Dated in Washington, D.C., May 31, 2000.
Charles H. Atherton,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-14756 Filed 6-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6330-01-M
Editorial Note on Part 67
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 67 appear by USCG-2001-10714, 69 FR 24983, 24984, May 5, 2004.

§ 67.10-35 Notice of approval and withdrawal of approval. ( a ) The Coast Guard publishes a notice of the approval or withdrawal of approval of a sound signal in the Local Notice to Mariners.
( b ) A listing of approved sound signals may be obtained from any District Commander.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5123

AN ACT

To require the Secretary of Education to provide

notification to States and State educational agencies regarding the availability of certain administrative funds to establish school safety hotlines.

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5123

AN ACT

To require the Secretary of Education to provide notification

to States and State educational agencies regarding the

availability of certain administrative funds to establish

school safety hotlines.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 5123 EH

1 SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

2 The Congress finds that—

3 (1) an estimated 255,000 violent incidents oc4 curred in 1999 on school property, at an official

5 school function, or while traveling to and from

6 school;

7 (2) for the complete school year July 1, 1997,

8 through June 30, 1998, there were 58 school-associ9 ated violent deaths that resulted from 46 incidents;

10 46 of these violent deaths were homicides, 11 were

11 suicides, and one teenager was killed by a law en12 forcement officer in the course of duty;

13 (3) although fewer school-associated violent

14 deaths have occurred in recent years, the total num15 ber of multiple victim homicide events has increased;

16 (4) in 1997, 5 percent of all 12th graders re17 ported that they had been purposefully injured, while

18 they were at school, with a weapon such as a knife,

19 gun, or club during the prior 12 months, and 14

20 percent reported that they had been injured on pur21 pose without a weapon;

22 (5) on average, each year from 1993 to 1997,

23 there were 131,400 violent crimes against teachers

24 at schools, as reported by teachers from both public

25 and private schools, which translates into a rate of

26 31 violent crimes for every 1,000 teachers;
3

•HR 5123 EH

1 (6) tools should be created for, and provided to,

2 students, teachers, parents, and administrators

3 across the country so that they have the ability to

4 provide the information necessary to law enforce5 ment authorities to take action before other trage6 dies occur; and

7 (7) school safety hotlines allow students, par8 ents, and school personnel the opportunity to report

9 threats of school violence to law enforcement au10 thorities, thus reducing incidents of youth violence.

11 SEC. 2. NOTIFICATION.

12 Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment

13 of this Act, the Secretary of Education shall provide writ14 ten notification to the States and State educational agen15 cies of the ability of States or State educational agencies,

16 as appropriate, to use State administrative funds provided

17 under title IV and title VI of the Elementary and Sec18 ondary Education Act of 1965 to implement programs re19 lated to the establishment and operation of a toll-free tele20 phone hotline that students, parents, and school personnel

21 use to report suspicious, violent, or threatening behavior
4

•HR 5123 EH

1 related to schools or school functions to law enforcement

2 authorities.

Passed the House of Representatives September 12,

2000.

Attest:

Clerk.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 17
- 00277
- CV

James Marshall, Appellant

v. Dolores Largent, Appellee

FROM THE PROBATE COU RT NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. C
- 1
- PB
- 16
- 001302 , THE HONORABLE GUY S. HERMAN, JUDGE PRE SIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
The clerk’s record in this appeal was due for filing in this Court on June 26, 2017

. On June 28, 2017 , we notified appellant that no clerk’s record had been filed due to his failure to pay or make ar rangements to pay the trial clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record. The notice requested that appellant make arrangements for the clerk’s record and submit a status report regarding this appeal by July 7, 2017 . Further, the notice advised appellant that his failure to comply with this request could result in the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. To date, appellant has not filed a status report or otherwise responded to this Court’s notice, and the clerk’s record has not been filed.

If a trial court clerk fails to file the clerk’s record due to an appellant’s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay for the clerk’s fee for preparing the record, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant was entitled to proceed2

without payment of costs. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). In this case, appellant has not established
that he is entitled to proceed without payment of costs. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 145. Because appellant has failed to pay or make arrange ments to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.

__________________________________________ Scott K. Field , Justice
Before Justices Puryear, Field, and Bourland
Dismissed for Want of Pr osecution
Filed : July 21, 2017
<PAGE>

                                 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Express Credit
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Walker C. Tompkins, Jr., as Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, 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; and

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


/s/ Walker C. Tompkins, Jr.
----------------------------------------
Name: Walker C. Tompkins, Jr.
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date: November 14, 2003

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, and is not being "filed" as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate
disclosure document for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), or otherwise subject to liability under
that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act except to the extent that this Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and
specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
gmi8kx103_6282012.htm


 


EXHIBIT 10.3







RESIGNATION

















To the Board of Directors of


Greenetech Mining International, Inc.,


a Delaware corporation







The undersigned, being an officer and director of the above-named corporation, does hereby resign from President, Secretary, Treasurer, and remains a Director of the Corporation.







Said resignation is contingent and expressly conditioned upon (a) the sale of 26,500,000 shares of the Company’s common shares to the Novus Aurum Trust and (b) the appointment of Matthew J. Neher as President, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary, Treasurer and Director of the corporation. Said resignation shall be effective on the date of the Closing of the transaction contemplated by the Subscription Agreements between the Company and Novus Aurum Trust.







Dated as of June 27, 2012







       /s/Timothy Nehe


       Timothy Neher
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 7867

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. WESLEY JERMAINE OWENS , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. ( 5:06

- cr - 00026

- BR

- 1 )

Submitted : April 29 , 2020 Decided: May 12, 2020

Before WILKINSON, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by un published per curiam opinion

. Wesley Jermaine Owens , Appellant Pro Se

. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Wesley Jermai ne Owens seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 225 5 (201 8 ) motion and denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (2018)

. We dismiss in part and affirm in part.
The portion of th e order denying § 2255 relief is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)( B ) (201 8 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (201 8 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claim s debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis , 137 S. Ct. 759, 773

- 74 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debat able claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000))

. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Owens has not made the requisite showing . Accordingly, we deny Owens’ motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal as to the denial of § 2255 relief

. Turning to the portion of the order denying the petition for a writ of error coram nobis, w e have reviewed the record and fin d no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Owens , No. 5:06

- cr - 00026

- BR

1 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 5, 2019). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately pre sented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED IN PART , AFFIRMED IN PART
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-25-2000
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   36,539
<RECEIVABLES>                                  174,660
<ALLOWANCES>                                   7,873
<INVENTORY>                                    202,780
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               608,652
<PP&E>                                         539,329
<DEPRECIATION>                                 325,116
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,583,804
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          607,428
<BONDS>                                        691,644
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    40,389
<COMMON>                                       2,479
<OTHER-SE>                                     134,247
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,583,804
<SALES>                                        1,084,519
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,161,700
<CGS>                                          1,021,143
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,056,097
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               116,829
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             25,591
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (23,505)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (6,387)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (17,118)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (17,118)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
#### § 80.1365 Columbia River Entrance, OR/WA.

A line drawn from the seaward extremity of the Columbia River North Jetty (above water) 155° true to the seaward extremity of the Columbia River South Jetty (above water).
#### § 6.01-1 Commandant.

*Commandant* as used in this part, means the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard.
UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO. 22-60221-CR-CANNON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

VICTOR AQUINO CATALAN,

Defendant.

/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation entered by 

Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt Following Change of Plea Hearing [ECF No. 14]. On December 

21, 2022, Magistrate Judge Hunt held a Change of Plea hearing [ECF No. 11] during which 

Defendant pled guilty to the sole count of the Indictment [ECF No. 1] pursuant to a stipulated 

factual proffer [ECF No. 12]. Magistrate Judge Hunt thereafter issued a Report recommending 

that the Court accept Defendant’s guilty plea to Count One of the Indictment, that the Court find 

Defendant to have freely and voluntarily entered his guilty plea, and that the Court adjudicate him

guilty of Count One of the Indictment [ECF No. 1]. Neither party objects to the Report 

[ECF Nos. 16, 17]. 

The Court has conducted a review of the record and finds no error in the Report. Therefore, 

it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 14] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. 

2. The guilty plea entered by Defendant Victor Aquino Catalan as to Count One of the 

Indictment is ACCEPTED.

Case 0:22-cr-60221-AMC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/03/2023 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 22-60221-CR-CANNON

3. Defendant Victor Aquino Catalan is adjudicated guilty of Count One of the Indictment, 

which charges him with illegal reentry after removal, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 3rd day of January 2023.

________________________________

AILEEN M. CANNON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 0:22-cr-60221-AMC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/03/2023 Page 2 of 2
§ 52.52 Notice of hearing. ( a ) If the Chair determines that a hearing is warranted, the Chair shall notify the applicant that a hearing has been granted.
( b ) The date of hearing shall be not less than 21 days from the date of this notification. Written notice stating the date, time, and place of the hearing shall be given to the applicant and the Coast Guard.
### Summary of the hydrology of the Floridan aquifer system in Florida and in parts of Georgia, South Carolina, and Alabama

By: Richard H. JohnstonPeter W. Bush

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1403A

#### Links

- More Information:                               - **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
  - **Publisher Index Page**                            (html) 
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
Exhibit














THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE
AARON’S, INC. EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN


THIS AMENDMENT to the Aaron’s, Inc. Employees Retirement Plan (the “Plan”) is made by the Administrative Committee of the Plan (the “Administrative Committee”).
W I T N E S S E T H :
WHEREAS, Aaron’s, Inc. maintains the Plan for the benefit of eligible employees; and
WHEREAS, the Plan provides that the Administrative Committee has the authority to amend the Plan at any time; and
WHEREAS, the Administrative Committee wishes to amend the Plan to reflect changes resulting from new laws related to hardship distributions; 
NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows, effective as of January 1, 2020:
		
	1.
	Section 9.2(c) of the Plan is amended to read as follows:


(c)    Necessary to Satisfy a Financial Need.  In order for a withdrawal to be considered as necessary to satisfy an immediate and heavy financial need of a Participant, the following requirements must be met: (i) prior to receiving a withdrawal hereunder, the Participant will be required to obtain all distributions, other than hardship withdrawals, and all nontaxable loans available under all plans maintained by the Controlling Company and its Affiliates; (ii) the Participant must represent (in writing, by an electronic medium, or in any other form permitted by applicable Treasury guidance) that he has insufficient cash or other liquid assets to satisfy the need; and (iii) the hardship withdrawal will not exceed the amount of the Participant’s immediate and heavy financial need; provided, the amount of an immediate and heavy financial need may include amounts necessary for the Participant to pay any federal, state or local taxes which are reasonably anticipated to result from the hardship withdrawal.
		
	2.
	Except as provided herein, the Plan will remain in full force and effect.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Administrative Committee has caused its duly authorized member to execute this Amendment on the date written below.


ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE


By:       /s/ John H. Karr                 


Name:     John H. Karr                        


Date:    August 23, 2019
#### EDWARD ABEEL and others, Respondents, *v.*IRA SEYMOUR and others, Appellants.

*Promissory note*— anithoriiy *to indm'se*— how *proved.*

In this action, brought to charge the defendant as the indorser of a promissory note, it appeared that he had been accustomed to assume the liability of indorser on promises on which his name had been written by his son; that he did not deny the validity of the indorsement in the present case until after his son had absconded, but impliedly admitted his liability upon it. *Held,*that these acts, unexplained, established, as against him, the authority of the son to indorse his name upon the note, and that he was liable thereon. *(Bi’uanv. Qengelle,*3 Esp., §0; *Weed*v. *Oa/rpenter,*10 Wend., 403; *Builw'-v. Stocking,*4Seld., 408; *Prescott*v. *Flinn,*9 Bing., 19.)

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon the report of a referee.

*George N. Kennedy,*for appellants. *Wm. G. Ruger,*for respondents.

■Opinion by

Gilbert, J.

Present — Mullin, P. J., Smith and Gilbert, JJ.

Judgment affirmed.
Annual Conference AGENDA 

Wednesday, September 30, 2015 | U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, Virginia

C O A L I T I O N O F F E D E R A L O M B U D S M A N

 8:00 Welcome, Introductions, Acknowledgements, 

and Year In Review

 8:15 Martial Arts and Conflict Resolution

Soolmaz Abooali

 8:45 Keynote Speaker – Howard Gadlin

with Special Guest, Mary Rowe

 9:50 Special Presentation

10:00 Break and Networking

10:15 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 

1. Deep Dive For New Ombuds and Interested Agencies

Virginia Behr, Joanne Dea, Scott Deyo, and Bill Maurer

2. Advanced Practice and Ethical Challenges

Kevin Jessar, Noreen Kinnavy, Samantha Levine-Finley, 

and Teresa Ralicki 

11:00 Current Federal Ombudsman Research

chiResolutions

11:30 Speed Mentoring

Riley Barrar

12:00 Lunch and Networking

Morning Sessions Afternoon Sessions

1:00 Legal Policy Updates

Julie Smith

1:30 Building Collaborative Partnerships

Renée Coates, Dawn Eilenberger, Rita Franklin, Patrick Holman, 

and Robert Scott

CONCURRENT SESSIONS 

For External Ombuds

2:30 Ombuds Writing: Using A Framework to Be Clear, 

Concise, and Effective

Wendy Kamenshine

3:00 Working with Challenging External Customers

Rena Girinakis, Claire Heffernan, and Guy Weber 

For Internal Ombuds

2:30 Applying Standards (with Policies, Briefings, and Reports)

Monique Bookstein and Scott Deyo

3:00 Working with Challenging Internal Visitors

David Michael

3:45 The Federal Ombuds –Your Thoughts and Next Steps 

COFO Executive Committee 

4:15 Closing Remarks and Adjourn

REGISTER

In Person:

or 

Webcast: