alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 127 (Friday, June 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 40630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16657]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-6608-7]


Environmental Impact Statement and Regulations; Availability of 
EPA Comments

    Availability of EPA comments prepared June 12, 2000 Through June 
16, 2000 pursuant to the Environmental Review Process (ERP), under 
Section 309 of the Clean Air Act and Section 102(2)(c) of the National 
Environmental Policy Act as amended. Requests for copies of EPA 
comments can be directed to the Office of FEDERAL ACTIVITIES AT (202) 
564-7167.
    An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental 
impact statements (EISs) was published in FR dated April 14, 2000 (65 
FR 20157).

Draft EISs

    ERP No. D-AFS-L65356-ID Rating NR, Box Canyon Timber Sale, 
Vegetative Management, Implementation, Palisades Ranger District, 
Caribou-Targhee National Forest, Bonneville County, ID.
    SUMMARY: EPA Region 10 used a screening tool to conduct a limited 
review of this action. Based upon this screen, EPA does not foresee 
having any environmental objections to the proposed project.
    ERP No. D-COE-C39014-NJ Rating EO2, Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, 
Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Project, Flood Control and Storm 
Damage Protection, Port Monmouth, Middletown Township, Monmouth County, 
NJ.
    SUMMARY: EPA objected to the proposed mitigation plan, and 
recommended wetlands enhancement at a 3:1 ratio or creation of a 
Spartina dominated wetland at a 1:1 ratio. EPA requested more 
information on enhancement, monitoring, and borrow areas.

 Final EISs

    ERP No. F-SFW-L03009-AK Wolf Lake Area Natural Gas Pipeline 
Project, Construction, Approval Right-of-Way Grant and COE Section 404 
Permit, Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, AK.
    SUMMARY: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

    Dated: June 27, 2000.
Joseph C. Montgomery,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 00-16657 Filed 6-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
ROBERT F. POOLE,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-3747

Opinion filed June 5, 2017.

Petition for Writ of Mandamus -- Original Jurisdiction

Robert F. Poole, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed. 

WETHERELL, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
# Comments on: 2019-2064: Murphy v. Wilkie
#### § 302-7.301 Is my UAB shipment in addition to the 18,000 pounds net weight of the HHG weight allowance?

No, for all shipments made under the authority of the FTR, the UAB shipment is part of, not in addition to, the 18,000 pounds net weight allowance for HHG.
§ 51-2.7 Fair market price. ( a ) The Committee is responsible for determining fair market prices, and changes thereto, for commodities and services on the Procurement List. The Committee is responsible for determining fair market prices, and changes thereto, for commodities and services on the Procurement List. The initial fair market price may be based on, where applicable, bilateral negotiations between contracting activities and authorized nonprofit agencies, market research, comparing the previous price paid, price competition, or any other methodology specified in Committee policies and procedures.
( b ) The initial fair market price may be revised in accordance with the methodologies established by the Committee, which include, where applicable, bilateral negotiations between contracting activities and authorized nonprofit agencies assisted by central nonprofit agencies, the use of economic indices, price competition, or any other methodology permitted under the Committee's policies and procedures.
( c ) After review and analysis, the central nonprofit agency shall submit to the Committee the recommended fair market price and, where a change to the fair market price is recommended, the methods by which prices shall be changed to the Committee, along with the information required by Committee pricing procedures to support each recommendation. The Committee will review the recommendations, revise the recommended prices where appropriate, and establish a fair market price, or change thereto, for each commodity or service which is the subject of a recommendation.
[64 FR 55842, Oct. 15, 1999, as amended at 89 FR 20338, Mar. 22, 2024]
No. 11-9346.

#### Tucker *v.*Murphy, Warden, et al.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
This opinion is subject to administrat ive correction before final disposition.

Before MONAHAN , STEPHENS , and DEERWESTER

Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES Appellee

v.
Michael A. TRU E Corporal (E

- 4 ), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

No. 20 2100152

_________________________
Decided: 13 June 2022
Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary
Military Judge s : Wilbur Lee ( arraignment and motions ) Don ald C. King (motions) Ann K. Minami ( motions and trial)
Sentence adjudged 15 March 2021 by a general court

- martial convened at Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam, Hawaii , and Marine Corps Base Hawaii , consisting of a military judge sitting alone

. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment : reduction to E

- 1, confinement for sixteen years, and a dishonorable discharge

. For Appellant:

Major Mary C. Finnen
, USMCUnited States v. True , NMCCA No. 202100152 Opinion of the Court

2 _________________________ This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2 (a)

.

_________________________
PER CURIAM : After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of
error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to A ppellant ’s substantial rights occurred. 1
T he findin gs and sentence are AFFIRMED

.

FOR THE COURT:

KYLE D. MEEDER Interim Clerk of Court

1 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
#### § 105-72.407 Property trust relationship.

Real property, equipment, intangible property and debt instruments that are acquired or improved with Federal funds shall be held in trust by the recipient as trustee for the beneficiaries of the project or program under which the property was acquired or improved. Agencies may require recipients to record liens or other appropriate notices of record to indicate that personal or real property has been acquired or improved with Federal funds and that use and disposition conditions apply to the property.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001             MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000             SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          22,434                  22,593
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,975                   6,510
<ALLOWANCES>                                       217                     239
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,935                  31,464
<PP&E>                                           6,556                   5,790
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,587                   1,921
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  37,102                  36,564
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,609                   5,540
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            17                      16
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,960                  30,431
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    37,102                  36,564
<SALES>                                          7,740                   7,193
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,996                  11,539
<CGS>                                              189                     241
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,607                   3,079
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,677                   8,946
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    25                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (677)                   (336)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    364                   (150)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       140                    (57)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                224                    (93)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                       224                    (93)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .01                   (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01                   (.01)


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Deangelo Cross, Appellant.

[628 NYS2d 724]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.), rendered May 18, 1993, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted of manslaughter and criminal possession of a weapon after he shot and killed a fellow youth following a verbal altercation with a group of youths on a subway car. On appeal, he argues, *inter alia,*that he was denied his right to counsel during a prearraignment lineup. Even if we assume that such error occurred, under the circumstances of this case any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Coates,*74 NY2d 244; *People v Jackson,*74 NY2d 787).

The defendant was placed at the crime scene by two prosecution witnesses who had not viewed a lineup. One of the prosecution witnesses was a friend of the defendant and was with him at the time of the shooting. Indeed, the defendant did not argue at trial that he was misidentified. Rather, he argued that the shooting was in self-defense in response to a threat of robbery. In addition, the defendant was linked to the crime by incriminating statements he made to an acquaintance and by spent bullet shells he left on the roof of a building which matched a shell found at the crime scene.

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions *408and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Ritter, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                             679
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,749
<ALLOWANCES>                                       219
<INVENTORY>                                      3,282
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   365
<PP&E>                                           6,270
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,678
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,555
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,751
<BONDS>                                          4,715
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,606
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,594)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,555
<SALES>                                         10,350
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,350
<CGS>                                            8,251
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,251
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,900
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 416
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (217)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (217)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (217)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.09)
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 23**

** **

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

The Board of DirectorsMossimo, Inc.

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registrationstatement (No. 333-10071) on Form S-8 and in the registrationstatement (No. 333-132974) on Form S-8 of Mossimo, Inc. of our reportdated March 24, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets ofMossimo, Inc. as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the relatedconsolidated statements of earnings, stockholders’ equity and cash flows foreach of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, whichreport appears in the December 31, 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K/Aof Mossimo, Inc.

 
| /s/ KPMG LLP            |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |
| Los Angeles, California |
| March 24, 2006     |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-1153

In re: VIVEK SHAH,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:15-cv-07542)

Submitted: April 19, 2018 Decided: April 24, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed in part, denied in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Vivek Shah, Petitioner Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Vivek Shah petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has 

unduly delayed ruling on his motion to reconsider the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 

(2012) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. The 

district court docket reflects that the district court issued an order on February 8, 2018, 

denying Shah’s motion to reconsider, thus mooting this aspect of the petition. To the 

extent that Shah challenges the district court’s disposition of the § 2255 motion, a 

mandamus petition is not a proper substitute for a direct appeal. In re Lockheed Martin 

Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, deny as moot Shah’s motion to expedite, and dismiss in part and deny in 

part the petition for a writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DISMISSED IN PART, 

DENIED IN PART
Exhibit 31.1

Rule 13a-14(a)

CERTIFICATION

I, John C. Fanning, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of COMFORCE Corporation, hereby certify that:

1. I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of COMFORCE Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|Date: May 5, 2006                   
|                                    
|/s/ John C. Fanning                 
|John C. Fanning,                    
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer



21
MEMORANDUM TO FILE 

TO: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0009; Approval of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Navajo Nation; Regional Haze Requirements for Navajo 

Generating Station; Proposed Rule 

FROM: Jared Blumenfeld 

Date: April 25, 2013 

Subject: Record of Meeting with President Ben Shelly during Public Comment Period 

1. Participants at Meeting 

 Jared Blumenfeld, EPA 

 Ben Shelly, President, Navajo Nation 

2. Date and Location of Meeting: 

 April 16, 2013, Gallup, NM 

3. General Statement of the Topic of Discussion: 

 We talked about NGS, impacts on jobs, and impacts on the community. 

4. Copy of Any Materials Presented or Received: 

 (none) 
MEMORANDUM TO FILE 

TO: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0009; Approval of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Navajo Nation; Regional Haze Requirements for Navajo 

Generating Station; Proposed Rule 

FROM: Jared Blumenfeld 

Date: April 25, 2013 

Subject: Record of Meeting with Dwight Witherspoon, Navajo Nation Council Delegate, 

during Public Comment Period 

1. Participants at Meeting 

 Jared Blumenfeld, EPA 

 Dwight Witherspoon, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation 

2. Date and Location of Meeting: 

 April 16, 2013, Window Rock, NM 

3. General Statement of the Topic of Discussion: 

 We talked about NGS and impacts to the community. Dwight is Council Delegate for Navajo 

Nation representing the Black Mesa area. 

4. Copy of Any Materials Presented or Received: 

 (none) 
MEMORANDUM TO FILE 

TO: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0009; Approval of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Navajo Nation; Regional Haze Requirements for Navajo 

Generating Station; Proposed Rule 

FROM: Jared Blumenfeld 

Date: April 24, 2013 

Subject: Record of Meeting with Black Mesa Water Coalition during Public Comment 

Period 

1. Participants at Meeting 

 Jared Blumenfeld, EPA 

 Wahleah Johns, Black Mesa Water Coalition 

 Marshall Johnson, Black Mesa Water Coalition 

2. Date and Location of Meeting: 

 April 17, 2013, Black Mesa, AZ 

3. General Statement of the Topic of Discussion: 

 We talked about NGS and impacts to communities. 

4. Copy of Any Materials Presented or Received: 

 (none) 
MEMORANDUM TO FILE 

TO: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0009; Approval of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Navajo Nation; Regional Haze Requirements for Navajo 

Generating Station; Proposed Rule 

FROM: Jared Blumenfeld 

Date: April 24, 2013 

Subject: Record of Meeting with Peabody Energy during Public Comment Period 

1. Participants at Meeting 

 Jared Blumenfeld, EPA 

 Brian Dunfee, Peabody Energy 

 Audry Rappleyea, Peabody Energy 

 G. Brad Brown, Peabody Energy 

2. Date and Location of Meeting: 

 April 17, 2013, Kayenta Mine, Kayenta, AZ 

3. General Statement of the Topic of Discussion: 

 We talked about NGS. 

4. Copy of Any Materials Presented or Received: 

 (none)
##### 



Exhibit 10.1
 AMERICAN GREETINGS CORPORATION
2007 OMNIBUS INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN   NONQUALIFIED STOCK OPTION GRANT TO EMPLOYEE
  Option
    
    Nonqualified option to purchase Class  Common Shares of
American Greetings Corporation (AG)Exercise Price
    
    $ per shareDate of Grant
    
    (the Date of Grant)Vesting
    
    The option granted hereby will become exercisable in the
manner set forth in your Notice of Grant, as such term is
defined below.
 Agreement Grantee Notice of Grant
 RECITALS
 Plan
 AGREEMENT
   Grant of Option Option Shares
 Exercisability of Option
   Term of Option
 Exercise Procedures




---



##### 



Restrictions on Exercise
 Grant Subject to Plan Provisions
 No Employment or Other Rights
 No Shareholder Rights
 Assignment and Transfers
 Applicable Law
 Notice
    AMERICAN GREETINGS CORPORATION
 By:
 GRANTEE
 By electronically accepting the Notice of
Grant in accordance with the instructions
in such notice, Grantee will be deemed a
party to, and legally bound by the terms
of, this Agreement.
#### § 302-10.4 Are there any geographic limitations for transportation of a mobile home?

Yes, allowances for overland transportation of a mobile home may be made only for transportation within CONUS, within Alaska, and through Canada en route between Alaska and CONUS or through Canada between one CONUS point and another (e.g., between Buffalo, NY and Detroit, MI). Allowances for transportation within limits prescribed may be paid even though the transportation involved originates, terminates, or passes through locations not covered, provided the amount of the allowance shall be computed on the basis of that part of the transportation which is within CONUS, within Alaska, or through Canada en route between Alaska and CONUS or between one CONUS point and another. The cost to transport a mobile home may not exceed the cost of shipping 18,000 pounds of HHG and 90 days of temporary storage.