alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 101.701 Eligibility. ( a ) Authorizations for stations in this service will be issued to existing and proposed common carriers. Applications will be granted only in cases in which it is shown that: ( 1 ) The applicant is legally, technically, financially and otherwise qualified to render the proposed service;
( 2 ) There are frequencies available to enable the applicant to render a satisfactory service; and
( 3 ) The public interest, convenience, and necessity would be served by a grant thereof.
( b ) If the content is originated, selected, controlled, or otherwise substantively influenced by the applicant, licensee, or a closely affiliated entity, no station or radio frequency in this service will be authorized, or may be utilized, to transmit any closed circuit television signals or television signals other than broadcast television signals, unless: ( 1 ) Such service is otherwise permitted for a specific length of time by grant of an acceptable petition for waiver of this rule; or
( 2 ) Such service is otherwise permitted by a condition in the applicable instrument of authorization; or
( 3 ) Such service is provided pursuant to applicable FCC tariff and is temporary and occasional intra-company television communication for management, network supervision, or other internal carrier functions. For purposes of this paragraph, an entity will be considered to be “closely affiliated” with an applicant if it is in a parent-subsidiary relationship, or both are commonly controlled, or they have any common officers or management employees.
( c ) Applications for stations or frequencies that will be used primarily to relay broadcast television signals must include a certification that at least fifty percent of the customers (or points of service) on the microwave system involved, including those served through an interconnecting carrier(s), receiving applicant's service, will not be related or affiliated in any degree with the applicant, and that the proposed usage by such customers, in terms of hours of use and channels delivered, must constitute at least fifty percent of the usage of the applicant's microwave service. Applications that do not contain these certifications will be returned as unacceptable for filing.
[61 FR 26677, May 28, 1996, as amended at 63 FR 68983, Dec. 14, 1998]
#### David Luther GHENT, Petitioner—Appellee, v. Jeanne S. WOODFORD, Warden, California State Prison at San Quentin, Respondent—Appellant.

No. 03-99004.

D.C. No. CV-90-02763-RMW.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted March 11, 2004.

Decided March 17, 2004.

*265Douglas R. Young, Grace K. Won, Far-ella Braun *&*Martel, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner-Appellee.

Joan Killeen, Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent-Appellant.

Before T.G. NELSON, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

ORDER*

The issues before us revolve around the opening paragraph of the order filed April 2, 2003, modifying the protective order, which provides as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that documents and information protected by the attorney-client privilege or the attorney work product doctrine revealed by petitioner in this habeas corpus proceeding are “Protected Information” and cannot be used for any purpose other than the litigation of petitioner’s writ application. The revelation or use of the Protected Information in the writ proceedings will not be considered a waiver of the attorney-client privilege or work product protection outside of the writ proceedings. However, Protected Information does not include such documents or information if they were obtained by means independent of the writ proceedings or their protection was waived by some conduct other than their revelation in the writ proceedings.

1. The above order is a supportable exercise of the district court’s discretionary authority to protect items covered by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. *See Bittaker v. Woodford,*331 F.3d 715, 727 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The parties do not disagree that the court has such authority, in general, but they disagree about the potential application of the foregoing paragraph.

2. The second sentence permissibly states that the federal hearing, without more, did not waive the above privileges, which is consistent with *Bittaker.*

3. As for the third sentence, we construe it (a) not to require or direct of its own force the sealing of any part of the writ proceedings and (b) not to list exhaustively other exceptions that the district court may deem appropriate when questions about specific applications of the order are presented to it.

So construed, we affirm the order.

We do not have before us at this time any sealing order entered by the district court based on the protective order. Nor do we have before us any decision by the district court addressing possible exceptions to the order. Any objections to the possible application of the protective order to specific items are therefore not ripe for our review.

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
No. 11-9039.

#### Briscoe *v.*Scribner, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Order filed June 13, 2013 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00099-CV

____________

24/7 GRILL, LLC, Appellant

V.

DONAL S. CLARK, Appellee

On Appeal from the 10th District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 04CV0895F

O R D E R

Appellant’s brief was due May 22, 2013. No brief or motion for extension of 

time has been filed. 

Unless appellant submits its brief, and a motion reasonably explaining why 

the brief was late, to the clerk of this court on or before July 15, 2013, the court 

will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Kody Douglas Taylor, * From the 42nd District

 Court of Taylor County,

 Trial Court No. 25441-A.

Vs. No. 11-14-00208-CR * October 23, 2014

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Bailey, J.

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is 

no error in the order below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, 

the order of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
§ 301-71.100 What is the purpose of the travel authorization process? The purpose is to: ( a ) Provide the employee information regarding what expenses you will pay;
( b ) Provide travel service vendors with necessary documentation for the use of travel programs;
( c ) Provide financial information necessary for budgetary planning; and
( d ) Identify purpose of travel.
§ 11.47 Optional use of other communications methods and systems. ( a ) Analog and digital broadcast stations may additionally transmit EAS messages through other communications means. For example, on a voluntary basis, FM stations may use subcarriers to transmit the EAS codes including 57 kHz using the RBDS standard produced by the National Radio Systems Committee (NRSC) and television stations may use subsidiary communications services.
( b ) Other technologies and public service providers, such as low earth orbiting satellites, that wish to participate in the EAS may contact the FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau or their State Emergency Communications Committee for information and guidance.
[70 FR 71034, Nov. 25, 2005, as amended at 71 FR 76220, Dec. 20, 2006; 72 FR 62135, Nov. 2, 2007]
§ 0.408 OMB Control Numbers and expiration dates assigned pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. OMB control numbers and expiration dates for the Commission information collection requirements assigned by the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 can be found at *https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain .* The Commission intends that this posting comply with the requirement that agencies “display” current OMB control numbers and expiration dates assigned by the Director, OMB, for each approved information collection requirement. Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that does not display a currently valid OMB control number. Questions concerning the OMB control numbers and expiration dates should be directed to the Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of Managing Director, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554 by sending an email to *PRA@fcc.gov .* [88 FR 21431, Apr. 10, 2023]
244P11-2

#### State v. Bruce Lamont Gorham

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for Notice of Appeal

1. Dismissed *ex mero motu*

2. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for PDR

2. Dismissed

3. Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Order of COA

3. Dismissed

4. Defs *Pro Se*Motion for Subpoena *Duces Tecum*

4. Dismissed

5. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Amend

5. Allowed

Ervin, J.,

recused
#### Daniel MASDEN, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. STATE of Nevada; Sharon Murphy; Freeman Johnson, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 03-16604.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted May 12, 2004.

Decided June 1, 2004.

Jeffrey A. Dickerson, Esq., Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

James T. Spencer, Office of the Attorney General, Carson City, NV, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, SILER,* and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The Honorable Eugene E. Siler, Jr., Senior United States Court of Appeals Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.

*145MEMORANDUM **

Neither party disputes that Daniel Mas-den’s counsel was grossly negligent in prosecuting his claim before the district court. However, as recognized by *Community Dental Services v. Tani,*282 F.3d 1164 (9th Cir.2002), “[a] proper finding of culpable conduct by [a party] would be sufficient to justify the district court’s refusal to grant a Rule 60(b) motion” despite such gross negligence. 282 F.3d at 1172.

Both when it initially dismissed Mas-den’s case and when it denied his Rule 60(b) motion, the district court felt compelled to “mention [Masden’s] behavior,” to “imply ... that [it] was considering [Masden] or his conduct as a factor” and to “suggest that [the dismissal was] motivated in ... part by a desire to sanction [Masden].” *Id.*The district court acted within its discretion in doing so, for Mas-den played an active role in the prosecution of the case and was specifically sanctioned, along with his lawyer, several times. And Masden cannot claim that he was unaware of the poor progress of his case in the year and a half before it was dismissed. He assured the district court judge that he would expedite the prosecution of his case after missing an early deadline, he paid in at least some of the monetary fines arising from his sanctions, and he received and ignored an order to appear personally at a hearing that preceded the default judgment. The denial of Masden’s subsequent motion to reopen his case falls squarely within the district court’s discretion under *Tani,*and the judgment is

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
No. 11-5153.

#### Brown *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
<PAGE>   1

EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
   

        We consent to the use of our report dated January 13, 1997 in this
Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Connective Therapeutics, Inc. (also known as
Connetics Corporation) for the year ended December 31, 1996, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements, as amended, included in this Form 10-K/A.

    

        We also consent to the incorporation by reference to the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-04985) pertaining to the 1995 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, 1994 Stock Plan and 1995 Director Stock Option Plan of
Connective Therapeutics, Inc. (also known as Connetics Corporation), of our
report dated January 13, 1997, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Connective Therapeutics, Inc. (also known as Connectics
Corporation) included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 1996.

                                        ERNST & YOUNG, LLP

Palo Alto, California
April 11, 1997
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.20005 Submission of policies and procedures and Commission review. ( a ) Each telecommunications carrier shall file with the Commission the policies and procedures it uses to comply with the requirements of this subpart. These policies and procedures shall be filed before commencing service and, thereafter, within 90 days of a carrier's merger or divestiture or a carrier's amendment of its existing policies and procedures.
( b ) The Commission shall review each telecommunications carrier's policies and procedures to determine whether they comply with the requirements of §§ 1.20003 and 1.20004. ( 1 ) If, upon review, the Commission determines that a telecommunications carrier's policies and procedures do not comply with the requirements established under §§ 1.20003 and 1.20004, the telecommunications carrier shall modify its policies and procedures in accordance with an order released by the Commission.
( 2 ) The Commission shall review and order modification of a telecommunications carrier's policies and procedures as may be necessary to insure compliance by telecommunications carriers with the requirements of the regulations prescribed under §§ 1.20003 and 1.20004.
( c ) As of June 29, 2023, any filings required by paragraph (a) of this section shall be submitted electronically through the Commission's CALEA Electronic Filing System (CEFS).
[71 FR 38108, July 5, 2006, as amended at 88 FR 34454, May 30, 2023]
Last First Company Address City ST Zip Phone Fax 

Brookman Douglas Public Solutions 108 Newburg Avenue Baltimore MD 21228 (410) 719-0580 (410) 719-0581 Pub

Burk Diana Navigant Consulting, Inc. 1801 K St., NW, Suite 500 Washington DC 20006 (202)-481-7362 (202)-973-2401 Dia

Graves Linda Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Mailstop EE-2J Washington DC 20585-0121 (202) 586-1851 (202) 586-4617 LindHakkarainen S. Pekka Lutron Electronics Company, Inc. 7200 Suter Road Coopersburg PA 18036-1299 (610) 282-6766 (610) 282-7477 pha

Hansen Dain National Electrical Manufacturers Association 1300 North 17th Street Suite 1752 Rosslyn VA 22209 (703) 841.3221 (703) 841-3321 DaiMyer Michael Pacific Northwest National Laboratory One Cranberry Hill, 750 Marrett Road, Suite 202 Lexington MA 2421 (781) 869-1418 (781) 869-1421 micO'Rourke Conan Lighting Research Center 21 Union Street Troy NY 12180 (518) 687-7182 (518) 687-7120 oro

Pinto Francine Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington DC 20585-0121 (202) 586-7432 Fra

Sequeira Christopher Navigant Consulting, Inc. 1801 K St., NW, Suite 500 Washington DC 20006 (202) 481-7383 (202)-973-2401 chri

Fluorescent Lamp Test Procedures for Standby and Off Mode Public Meeting - February 2, 2009

EERE-2008-BT-TP-0007 COMMENT 21
130P16

#### State v. Jamario Jermaine McClure

Defs Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Decision of COA (COA15-266)

Denied
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 Annual  Report of Pear  Network,  Inc. on Form
10-KSB for the period ending  September  30, 2002, as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,  Christopher C.
Corwin, President of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that, to
the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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 result of
                  operations of the Company.


/S/ Christopher C. Corwin
Christopher C. Corwin
President, Director
(Principal Executive Officer)


February 16, 2004


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
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.
No. 11-844.

No. 11-862.

#### Tellechea *v.*United States; and Bradley et al. *v.*United States.

C. A. llth Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 644 F. 3d 1213.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 5, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 41376]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16866]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00-1395; MM Docket No. 99-276; RM-9702]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Tillamook and Scappoose, OR

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the request of Thunderegg Wireless, L.L.C., 
licensee of Station KJUN, Tillamook, OR, reallots Channel 281C3 from 
Tillamook to Scappoose, OR, as the community's first local aural 
service, and modifies the license of Station KJUN to specify Scappoose 
as its community of license. See 64 FR 50266, September 16, 1999. 
Channel 281C3 can be allotted to Scappoose in compliance with the 
Commission's minimum distance separation requirements with a site 
restriction of 6.5 kilometers (4.1 miles) northwest, at coordinates 45-
46-58 NL; 122-57-13 WL, to accommodate petitioner's desired transmitter 
site. Canadian concurrence in the allotment has been obtained since 
Scappoose is located within 320 kilometers (200 miles) of the U.S.-
Canadian border.

DATES: Effective August 7, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leslie K. Shapiro, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 99-276, adopted June 14, 2000, and 
released June 23, 2000. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, 
DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services, 
Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334. 336.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oregon, is 
amended by removing Channel 281C3 at Tillamook and adding Scappoose, 
Channel 281C3.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-16866 Filed 7-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
No. 10-10960.

#### Rosebrough *v.*Butler.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
79–008

106TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 106–395

AGREEING TO THE CONFERENCE REQUESTED BY THE SENATE ON H.R. 3064, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000

OCTOBER 18, 1999.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. LINDER, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. Res. 333]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 333, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for the disagreement by the House on the

Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 3064, the District of Columbia

Appropriations Act, 2000, and the agreement by the House to the

conference requested by the Senate thereon.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 126 (Thursday, June 29, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40138-40139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16496]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-37,697]


Scientific Research Company, Portland, Oregon; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on May 22, 2000, in response to a petition filed by a 
company official on behalf of workers at Scientific Research Company, 
Portland, Oregon.

[[Page 40139]]

    The company official submitting the petition has requested that the 
petition be withdrawn. Consequently, further investigation in this case 
would serve no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC this 2nd day of June, 2000.
Grant D. Beale,
Program Manager, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-16496 Filed 6-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
EXHIBIT 21.1

****

----

Subsidiaries of the Registrant 

Subsidiaries of the Registrant 

|   | Citizens National Bank of Southwest Florida, Naples, Collier County, Florida. |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Organized under the laws of the United States.                                |
|   |                                                                          |
|   | Citizens Capital Management, Inc., Naples, Collier County, Florida.           |
|   | A Florida Corporation.                                                        |
|   |                                                                          |
|   | Bank of Florida, Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida.                     |
|   | Organized under the laws of the State of Florida.                             |
No. 11-5317.

#### Nunez-Polanco *v.*United States.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.