alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 June 25, 2013

s0617

Order 

Clerk

June 25, 2013

146229

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 146229

COA: 310548

Saginaw CC: 06-027120-FJ

DEONDRE DEQWAINE GAINES, Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 8, 2012

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
274P15-2

#### Robert K. Stewart v. Honorable James M. Webb

1. Pit’s *Pro Se*Motion for Complaint

1. Dismissed

2. Pit’s *Pro Se*Motion to Proceed *In Forma Pauperis*

2. Allowed

3. Pit’s *Pro Se*Motion to Appoint Counsel

3. Dismissed as moot
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 118 (Monday, June 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37973-37974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15399]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-6718-7]


Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; West 
Site/Hows Corner Superfund Site, Plymouth, Maine

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 122(i) of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended 
(``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed 
administrative settlement for recovery of past response costs 
concerning the West Site/Hows Corner Superfund Site, Plymouth, Maine 
with the Hows Corner/West Site RI/FS PRP Group. The settlement provides 
a $300,000 credit towards settlement of past costs for the RI/FS PRP 
Group, in exchange for the PRP Group's performance of a Remedial 
Investigation/Feasibility Study at the Site. For thirty (30) days 
following the date of publication of this document, the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency will receive written comments relating 
to the settlement. The United States Environmental Protection Agency 
will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its 
consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or 
considerations which indicate that the settlement is inappropriate, 
improper, or inadequate. The United States Environmental Protection 
Agency's response to any comments received will be available for public 
inspection at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-New England, 
One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before July 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is available for public inspection 
at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-New England, One Congress 
Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114. A copy of the proposed settlement 
may be obtained from Barbara O'Toole, Responsible Party Coordinator, 
U.S. EPA, Region 1, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (HBS), Boston, MA 
02114, (617) 918-1408. Comments should reference the West Site/Hows 
Corner Superfund Site, Plymouth, Maine and EPA Docket No. CERCLA 1-
2000-005 and should be addressed to Barbara O'Toole, Responsible Party 
Coordinator,

[[Page 37974]]

U.S. EPA, EPA-New England, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (HBS), 
Boston, MA 02114.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara O'Toole, Responsible Party 
Coordinator, U.S. EPA, EPA-New England, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 
(HBS), Boston, MA 02114, (617) 918-1408.

    Dated: May 26, 2000.
Patricia L. Meaney,
Director, Office of Site Remediation and Restoration, EPA-New England.
[FR Doc. 00-15399 Filed 6-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
November 1, 2012
US DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION DOCKET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1200 NEW JERSEY AVE. SE WEST BLDG., GROUND FLOOR, ROOM W12-140 WASHINGTON, DC 20590
Re: AMT INTERIOR DESIGN, INC./ EXEMPTION WITHDRAWAL Docket No. FAA-2012-1129
Sirs:
Please withdraw our initial Petition for Exemption filed under Docket No. FAA-2012-1129.
Thank you.

# ~~~~~~~~A~CC~O~UNTABL~~R~ ELIZ BETH SANCHEZ, DRUG PROGRAM MANAGER AMT Interior Design Inc. 1050Arion Pkwy, Ste 114 San Antonio, Tx -78216 · 210-495-2900



### CC: JON HOPKINS, INSPECTOR FAA DRUG ABATEMEN DIV. 2601 MEACHAM BLVD. Rm 121 FT
..WORTH, TX 76137
CC: FAA DRUG ABATEMENT DIVISION {AAM-800) 800 INDEPENDENCE AVE. SW ROOM 806 WASHIN.GTON, DC 20591

. '',,. 

### ,.__, { 

# = :-:)- .._, (J:r;;

## f.:.;**~-** 

### 7':>' CJ r-n

### :z:=:;;z <: --!(/)- I 

### -o:O Oo--1 

### cr -u:I:J!5: rrr--in, 

### )> ;;:D:;r;:.Z P--r--1**~-o** 

### -P. 

# -o 0----n

### zrU1 

### co ......J
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 125 (Wednesday, June 28, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 39852]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16372]


========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 125 / Wednesday, June 28, 2000 / 
Notices

[[Page 39852]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

[TB-00-12]


Burley Tobacco Advisory Committee--Notice of Committee Renewal

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of committee renewal.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Secretary of Agriculture has 
renewed the Burley Tobacco Advisory Committee for an additional period 
of 2 years.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John P. Duncan III, Deputy 
Administrator, Tobacco Programs, AMS, USDA, 300 12th Street, S.W., Stop 
0280, Room 502 Annex Building, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, D.C. 20090-
6456, (202) 205-0567.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee, which reports to the 
Secretary through the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory 
Programs, recommends opening dates and selling schedules for the burley 
marketing area which aid the Secretary in making an equitable 
apportionment and assignment of tobacco inspectors. The Committee 
consists of 39 members; 21 producer representatives, 10 warehouse 
representatives, and 8 buyer representatives, representing all segments 
of the burley tobacco industry and meets at the call of the Secretary. 
The Secretary has determined that renewal of this Committee is in the 
public interest.
    To ensure that recommendations of the Committee take into account 
the needs of diverse groups served by the Department, membership should 
include, to the extent practicable, persons with demonstrated ability 
to represent minorities, women, and persons with disabilities.
    This notice is given in compliance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.).

    Dated: June 22, 2000.
Paul W. Fiddick,
Assistant Secretary for Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-16372 Filed 6-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
§ 302-3.511 What must we consider when determining return travel for immediate family member(s) for compassionate reasons prior to completion of the service agreement? You must determine that the public interest requires the return of the immediate family for compelling personal reasons of a humanitarian or compassionate nature, which may involve: ( a ) The immediate family member(s)' physical or mental health;
( b ) The death of a member of the immediate family;
( c ) Obligations imposed by authority or circumstances over which the individual has no control;
( d ) The divorce or annulment of the employee's marriage; or
( e ) A dependent that traveled to post of duty on the employee's authorized TA and has now reached their 21st birthdate.
[FTR Amdt. 98, 66 FR 58196, Nov. 20, 2001, as amended by FTR Case 2022-05, 89 FR 12254, Feb. 16, 2024]
459P00-5

#### State v. William M. Huggins

Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Mandamus*

Dismissed
1 

### Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 1:03 PM

To: 'jason@candyfactoryfilms.com'

Cc: '333exemptions@faa.gov' Subject: Petition for Exemption: Cand y Factory Productions (FAA-2015-0759)



### July 28, 2015

Dear Mr. Ward:

This letter is to inform you th at the following information is mi ssing from your petition (Docket No.

FAA

− 2015

− 0759). This information is necessary for the Fe deral Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, S ection 1. If you wish for us to proceed without this manual and remove closed-set filming from your proposed operat ion please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Hea dquarters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov . If

you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information described above by August 11, 2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Nia Daniels, ARM

‐ 108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075 nia.daniels@faa.gov
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7534

In Re: COURTNEY CONSTANTINE WATSON,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (8:04-cr-00104-RWT) Submitted: December 20, 2006 Decided: January 8, 2007 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed without prejudice by unpublished per curiam opinion. Courtney Constantine Watson, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Courtney Constantine Watson filed an original 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition in this court. Because Watson is incarcerated in Georgia, no circuit judge on this court has jurisdiction over his § 2241 petition. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the § 2241 petition without prejudice to Watson’s right to refile the petition in the district of his incarceration. 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.

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
                         ------------------------------

Linographics Corporation, a New York corporation

Unidigital  Elements (SF), Inc.,  a Delaware corporation,  doing business as TX,
     Unidigital California, Inc. and Unison (SF) in California

Unison (NY), Inc., a Delaware corporation

Unison (MA), Inc., a Delaware corporation

Mega Art Corp., a New York corporation

SuperGraphics Holding Company, Inc., a Delaware corporation

SuperGraphics Corporation, a California corporation, and wholly-owned subsidiary
     of SuperGraphics Holding Company, Inc.

Elements (UK) Limited, a United Kingdom corporation

Regent  Group Limited, a United Kingdom corporation, and wholly-owned subsidiary
     of Elements (UK) Limited

Big  Bills Limited, a United Kingdom corporation, and wholly-owned subsidiary of
     Elements (UK) Limited

M. Nur Marketing & Kommunikation GmbH, a corporation organized under the laws of
     Germany
| 1.   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  May 6, 2010 | /s/ DOUGLAS J. ANDREA                           |
|------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
|                         | Douglas J. Andrea                               |
|                         | Chairman of the Board, President,               |
|                         | Chief Executive Officer and Corporate Secretary |
|                         |                                            |
|                         | /s/ CORISA L. GUIFFRE                           |
|                         | Corisa L. Guiffre                               |
|                         | Vice President, Chief Financial Officer         |
|                         | and Assistant Corporate Secretary               |
No. 10-10933.

#### Marston *v.*Livingston, Executive Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# AGENCY: 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

# ACTION: 

Notice of Intent. 

# SUMMARY: 

                        The Federal Highway Administration is issuing this notice of intent to advise the public that an environmental impact statement will be prepared for a proposed highway project in Valley County, Idaho.                        Start Printed Page 3755

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Loren D. Thomas, District Engineer, District 3, Idaho Transportation Department (ITD), 8150 Chinden Blvd., Boise, Idaho 83707, Telephone (208) 334-8300, 

or

Jack T. Coe, Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, 3050 Lake Harbor Lane, Suite 126, Boise, Idaho, 83703, Telephone: 208-334-1843.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The FHWA in cooperation with the ITD will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on a proposal to improve State Highway 55 (SH-55) in Valley County, Idaho. The proposed improvements would involve seven miles of existing SH-55 from approximately 4 miles south of Smith's Ferry (Milepost 95) to Round Valley (Milepost 102).

The improvements on State Highway 55 are considered necessary to improve safety, increase capacity, accommodate economic development, and correct operational deficiencies in the roadway.

Alternatives under consideration include: (1) taking no action; (2) improving the existing two-lane highway along the North Fork of the Payette River; (3) constructing a two or four lane rural highway on new alignment. Incorporated into and studied with the various build alternatives will be design variations of grade and alignment.

Letters describing the proposed action and soliciting comments will be sent to the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies and citizens who have previously expressed interest in this proposed project. Scoping will begin with the publication of the Notice of Intent. As part of the scoping process, a series of public information meetings will be held in Valley County beginning in February 2000. In addition, a public hearing will be held. Public notice will be given of the time and place of any public information meetings and the public hearing. The draft EIS will be made available for public and agency review and comment.

To ensure that the full range of issues related to this proposed action are addressed and all significant issues are identified, comments and suggestions are invited from all interested parties.

Comments or questions concerning this proposed action and the EIS should be directed to the ITD or FHWA at the addresses provided above.

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; 23 CFR 771.123. 

Issued on: January 13, 2000.

Pamela S. Cooksey,

Assistant Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho.

[FR Doc. 00-1616 Filed 1-21-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-22-M
Order entered June 28, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00129-CR

BRANDON KYRELL JEFFERY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 59th Judicial District Court

Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 068488

ORDER

Before Justices Brown, Schenck, and Pedersen, III

Before the Court is appellant’s May 22, 2019 motion for rehearing. We DENY the 

motion for rehearing.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
**Exhibit 10.2**

**AMENDMENT**

**TO THE**

**WYETH 2002 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN**

**WYETH 1999 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN**

**WYETH 1996 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN**

Effective as of September 27, 2007, the Wyeth 2002 Stock Incentive Plan, the Wyeth 1999 Stock Incentive Plan and the Wyeth 1996 Stock Incentive Plan were amended as follows: 

Section 8 was amended to read in its entirety as follows: 

Section 8. Adjustment in Event of Change in Stock. Subject to Section 9, in the event of a stock split, stock dividend, cash dividend (other than a regular cash dividend), combination of shares,merger, or other relevant change in the Company’s capitalization, the Committee shall adjust in the manner determined by the Committee in its sole discretion to be appropriate (i) the number and kind of shares available for issuance underthe Plan, (ii) the number, kind and Option Price of shares subject to outstanding Options and Stock Appreciation Rights and/or (iii) the number and kind of shares subject to outstanding Restricted Stock awards; provided, however, that,except in the case of incentive stock options, the number, kind and Option Price of shares subject to outstanding Options and Stock Appreciation Rights shall be adjusted in the manner described in Section 1.409A-1(b)(5)(v)(D) of the TreasuryRegulations; provided, further, that to the extent permitted in the case of incentive stock options by Sections 422 and 424 of the Code, in the event that the outstanding shares of Common Stock of the Company are increased or decreasedor changed into or exchanged for a different number or kind of shares or other securities of the Company or of another corporation, through reorganization, merger, consolidation, liquidation, recapitalization, reclassification, stock split-up,combination of shares or dividend, appropriate adjustment in the number and kind of shares as to which Options may be granted and as to which Options or portions thereof then unexercised shall be exercisable, and in the Option Price thereof, shallbe made to the end that the proportionate number of shares or other securities as to which Options may be granted and the Participant’s proportionate interests under outstanding Options shall be maintained as before the occurrence of suchevent; provided, that any such adjustment in shares subject to outstanding Options (including any adjustments in the Option Price) shall be made in such manner as not to constitute a modification as defined by subsection (h)(3) of Section 424of the Code; and provided, further, that, in the event of an adjustment in the number or kind of shares under a Restricted Stock award pursuant to this Section 8, any new shares or units issued to the Participant in respectthereof shall be subject to the same terms, conditions and restrictions as the underlying Restricted Stock award for which the adjustment was made. 

 

1
No. 10-11130.

#### Fox *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Argued and submitted May 23,

convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing July 19, 1995

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*CLIFFORD PHILLIP DECK, *Appellant.*

(10-94-01640, 10-94-01681; CA A84611 (Control), A84612)

(Cases Consolidated)

898 P2d 1370

James N. Varner, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender.

Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Landau and Leeson, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*539PER CURIAM

Under a plea agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to burglary in the first degree and attempted rape in the first degree. In a separate proceeding, he pleaded guilty to sexual abuse in the third degree. Two separate judgments were entered, but the convictions were consolidated for sentencing. On the burglary conviction,1 the trial court imposed an 80-month upward-departure incarceration term “subject to ORS 137.635.”

The state concedes that the trial court erred in imposing the upward-departure sentence, because defendant had not been convicted of any felony designated in the applicable subsection of ORS 137.635. We accept the concession.

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.

1

 Defendant assigns error only to the sentence imposed on the burglary conviction.
§ 303-70.602 Must we pay transportation costs to return the deceased employee's POV from the TDY location or from an official station OCONUS under § 303-70.600? Yes. You must pay costs associated with returning the POV from the following: ( a ) TDY location to the employee's permanent official station, if the agency had authorized the use of the employee's POV at the TDY location as more advantageous to the Government than other means of transportation; or
( b ) Official station OCONUS to the employee's former actual residence or alternate destination as approved by the agency, if the agency had determined that the use of the employee's POV was required in accordance with part 302-9 of this Title.
#### § 102-2.75 What timeframes apply to deviations?

Timeframes vary based on the nature of the deviation. However, deviations cannot be open-ended. When consulting with GSA about using an individual or class deviation, you must set a timeframe for the deviation's duration.
#### § 50-201.1101 Minimum wages.

Determinations of prevailing minimum wages or changes therein will be published in the Federal Register by the Wage and Hour Division, ESA, of the Department of Labor.

[52 FR 6147, Mar. 2, 1987]