alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0589

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

TIMOTHY ERIC RITESMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including February 20, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 12 2024

01/12/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0589
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DAVID CARL IMHOFF,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 291 WAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 4th day of January, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

February 16, 2024

ERRATA

______________________ 

Appeal Nos. 2022-2008, 2022-2010

FANTASIA TRADING LLC, DBA ANKERDIRECT,

Appellant

v.

COGNIPOWER, LLC,

Appellee

______________________ 

Issued: February 9, 2024

Judgment

______________________ 

Please make the following change: 

On page 2, change “PER CURIAM (MOORE, Chief Judge,

STOLL and BENCIVENGO, Circuit Judges)” to --PER CURIAM

(MOORE, Chief Judge, STOLL, Circuit Judge, and

BENCIVENGO, District Judge1).--

1 Honorable Cathy Ann Bencivengo, District Judge, 

United States District Court for the Southern District of 

California, sitting by designation.

Case: 22-2008 Document: 59 Page: 1 Filed: 02/16/2024
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULES 13a-14 AND 15d-14****OF THE 1934 SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT**
     I, Katherine Greenberg, certify that:
     1.     I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Endocare, Inc.;
     2.     Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annualreport;
     3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;
     4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;
     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially 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, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):
     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   Date: March 15, 2004 /s/ Katherine Greenberg    Katherine GreenbergSenior Vice President andChief Financial Officer(principal accounting officer)
#### § 50-205.10 Modification or termination of agreement.

Any agreement entered into this part may be modified at any time with the consent of both parties, and may be terminated by either party after notifying the other party 60 days prior thereto.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

In connection with the periodic report of Connetics Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Thomas G. Wiggans,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the
date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the
United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

         (1)      the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
                  indicated.

Date:  March 5, 2003



       /s/ Thomas G. Wiggans
-------------------------------------
Thomas G. Wiggans
President and Chief Executive Officer
§ 22.809 Transmitting power limits. The transmitting power of ground and airborne mobile transmitters operating on the channels listed in § 22.805 must not exceed the limits in this section. ( a ) *Ground station transmitters.* The effective radiated power of ground stations must not exceed 100 Watts and must not be less than 50 Watts, except as provided in § 22.811.
( b ) *Airborne mobile transmitters.* The transmitter power output of airborne mobile transmitters must not exceed 25 Watts and must not be less than 4 Watts.
#### INTIMATE IDEAS, INC., a Michigan corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, a Michigan municipal corporation, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-1090.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

March 16, 2004.

Gregory F. Lord, Lord *&*Legghio, Sterling Heights, MI, Allan S. Rubin, Law Office of Allan S. Rubin, Southfield, MI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Janice F. Bailey, Catherine M. Mish, City Attorney’s Office for the City of Grand Rapids, Grand Rapids, MI, Scott D. Bergthold, Scottsdale, AZ, for Defendants Appellant.

Before MARTIN, CLAY, and CUDAHY, Circuit Judges.*

*

 The Honorable Richard D. Cudahy, Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, sitting by designation.

*ORDER*

In this action, the plaintiff challenged Article 25 of the zoning ordinance adopted *135by the City of Grand Rapids. Article 25 regulated the operation of adult bookstores. The district court entered a preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of Article 25, and the City brought this appeal. The plaintiff now advises that it has permanently ceased its business within Grand Rapids. Both the plaintiff and the City agree that as a result this appeal now is moot. The City further states that any future business that the plaintiff might commence would be governed by a new ordinance.

There is no longer a case or controversy between these parties. When a controversy becomes moot on appeal, the proper course is to vacate the order and to remand to the district court with instructions to dismiss the complaint. *United States v. Munsingwear, Inc.,*340 U.S. 36, 39, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950); *United States v. Taylor,*8 F.3d 1074, 1077 (6th Cir.1993).

Therefore, the order on appeal is VACATED. The district court is instructed to dismiss the complaint as moot.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Year-to-Date Activity 

as of May 30, 2014

Court or Agency of Origin

Pending as of 

10/01/13

Docketed 

10/01/13 to date

Terminated 

10/01/13 to date

Currently 

Pending 

Boards of Contract Appeals 8 14 8 14

Court of Federal Claims 119 99 107 111

Court of International Trade 55 26 31 50

Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 104 94 113 85

District Courts 438 364 311 491

Department of Justice 2 5 3 4

Department of Veterans Affairs 1 1 0 2

International Trade Commission 19 9 12 16

Merit Systems Protection Board 104 130 142 92

Office of Personnel Management 0 0 0 0

Office of Compliance 0 2 0 2

Patent & Trademark Office 118 117 119 116

Writs & Other Original Proceedings 15 41 46 10

TOTAL 983 902 892 993
Slot Holder and Operator Reports by Carrier, Day, and Slot Time for Docket Number 

FAA-2014-1073:

In response to requests received for information related to the notice of proposed rulemaking 

entitled “Slot Management and Transparency for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy 

International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport”,1 the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) previously posted a number of slot reports providing summary slot holder 

and operator information during particular periods at John F. Kennedy International Airport 

(JFK),2 LaGuardia Airport (LGA),3 and Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR).

4

Additional information detailing the carrier slot allocations for August 2009 at JFK, LGA, and 

EWR has been placed in the Docket. The reports include information on slots held or operated 

by carrier, airport, and day of week, slot time, and arrival or departure for the weeks of August 3, 

10, 17, 24, and 31, 2009. The report status date reflects FAA confirmed slot transactions as of 

that date. The reports for LGA exclude Saturdays and before 1200 local time on Sundays as 

those periods are not slot controlled. 

In some cases, the reports do not reflect all transfers between mainline carriers marketing flights 

and the operating regional carriers. These slots would be reflected primarily as the mainline 

rather than the regional carrier.

 1 80 FR 1273, January 8, 2015.

2 Docket No. FAA-2014-1073-0026. 3 Docket No. FAA-2014-1073-0027. 4 Docket No. FAA-2014-1073-0029.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 126 (Thursday, June 29, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 40122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16439]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[WY-920-00-1320-EL, WYW141435]


Horse Creek Coal Lease Application, Wyoming

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Availability (NOA) of Record of Decision.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) announces the availability 
of the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) for the Horse Creek Coal Lease Application. That EIS analyzes the 
potential impacts of leasing and mining Federal coal on lands in 
Campbell County, Wyoming. BLM's decision was to approve the Selected 
Alternative, which analyzed the impacts of offering for competitive 
lease sale approximately 2,819 acres containing approximately 356 
million tons of in-place Federal coal.
    BLM received 13 written comments during the two scoping periods on 
the Horse Creek lease application. These comments are on file in the 
Casper and Cheyenne offices of the BLM. Nine written comments were 
received on the draft EIS, and these were included, with written 
responses, in the final EIS. The transcript of the formal hearing is on 
file in the Casper and Cheyenne Offices of the BLM. One written comment 
was received on the final EIS. All comments that were received during 
the process were considered in the preparation of the draft and final 
EIS's, and in the ROD.
    BLM NOAs for the draft EIS and for the final EIS for this project 
were published in the Federal Register on November 12, 1999 (64 FR 
61635), and on May 19, 2000 (65 FR 31898), respectively.

DATES: The ROD was signed by the Associate State Director on June 23, 
2000. Parties in interest have the right to appeal that decision 
pursuant to 43 CFR part 4, within 30 days from the date of publication 
of this NOA in the Federal Register. The ROD contains instructions on 
taking appeals to the Interior Board of Land Appeals.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melvin Schlagel, 307-775-6257. Copies 
of the ROD may be obtained from the following BLM offices: Casper Field 
Office, 2987 Prospector Drive, Casper, Wyoming 82604, 307-261-7600 and 
Wyoming State Office, 5353 Yellowstone Road, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009, 
307-775-6256.

    Dated: June 23, 2000.
Phil Perlewitz,
Acting Deputy State Director, Minerals and Lands Authorization.
[FR Doc. 00-16439 Filed 6-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-22-P
238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2010-12-23T16:22:00-0500
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
#### §§ 22.203-22.211 [Reserved]
§ 15.215 Additional provisions to the general radiated emission limitations. ( a ) The regulations in §§ 15.217 through 15.257 provide alternatives to the general radiated emission limits for intentional radiators operating in specified frequency bands. Unless otherwise stated, there are no restrictions as to the types of operation permitted under these sections.
( b ) In most cases, unwanted emissions outside of the frequency bands shown in these alternative provisions must be attenuated to the emission limits shown in § 15.209. In no case shall the level of the unwanted emissions from an intentional radiator operating under these additional provisions exceed the field strength of the fundamental emission.
( c ) Intentional radiators operating under the alternative provisions to the general emission limits, as contained in §§ 15.217 through 15.257 and in subpart E of this part, must be designed to ensure that the 20 dB bandwidth of the emission, or whatever bandwidth may otherwise be specified in the specific rule section under which the equipment operates, is contained within the frequency band designated in the rule section under which the equipment is operated. In the case of intentional radiators operating under the provisions of subpart E, the emission bandwidth may span across multiple contiguous frequency bands identified in that subpart. The requirement to contain the designated bandwidth of the emission within the specified frequency band includes the effects from frequency sweeping, frequency hopping and other modulation techniques that may be employed as well as the frequency stability of the transmitter over expected variations in temperature and supply voltage. If a frequency stability is not specified in the regulations, it is recommended that the fundamental emission be kept within at least the central 80% of the permitted band in order to minimize the possibility of out-of-band operation.
[54 FR 17714, Apr. 25, 1989, as amended at 62 FR 45333, Aug. 27, 1997; 67 FR 34855, May 16, 2002; 69 FR 3265, Jan. 23, 2004; 70 FR 6774, Feb. 9, 2005; 79 FR 24578, May 1, 2014]
§ 24.815 Technical content of applications; maintenance of list of station locations. ( a ) All applications required by this part shall contain all technical information required by the application forms or associated Public Notice(s). Applications other than initial applications for a broadband PCS license must also comply with all technical requirements of the rules governing the broadband PC (*see* subparts C and E of this part as appropriate). The following paragraphs describe a number of general technical requirements.
( b ) Each application (except applications for initial licenses filed on Form 175) for a license for broadband PCS must comply with the provisions of §§ 24.229-24.238 of the Commission's Rules.
( c ) - ( i ) [Reserved]
( j ) The location of the transmitting antenna shall be considered to be the station location. Broadband PCS licensees must maintain a current list of all station locations, which must describe the transmitting antenna site by its geographical coordinates and also by conventional reference to street number, landmark, or the equivalent. All such coordinates shall be specified in terms of degrees, minutes, and seconds to the nearest second of latitude and longitude.
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 130 (Thursday, July 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 41728]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-17077]

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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 731-TA-464 (Review)]

Sparklers From China

Determination

    On the basis of the record \1\ developed in the subject five-year 
review, the United States International Trade Commission determines, 
pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 
1675(c)) (the Act), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on 
sparklers from China would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States 
within a reasonably foreseeable time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Commission instituted this review on July 1, 1999 (64 FR 35689) 
and determined on October 1, 1999 that it would conduct a full review 
(64 FR 55960, October 15, 1999). Notice of the scheduling of the 
Commission's review and of a public hearing to be held in connection 
therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of 
the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and 
by publishing the notice in the Federal Register on February 16, 2000 
(65 FR 7892). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on May 11, 2000, 
and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear 
in person or by counsel.
    The Commission transmitted its determination in this review to the 
Secretary of Commerce on July 10, 2000. The views of the Commission are 
contained in USITC Publication 3317 (July 2000), entitled Sparklers 
from China: Investigation No. 731-TA-464 (Review).

    By order of the Commission.
    Issued: June 28, 2000.
 Donna R. Koehnke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-17077 Filed 7-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
```
#### § 60-2.34 Supersedure.

All orders, instructions, regulations, and memorandums of the Secretary of Labor, other officials of the Department of Labor and contracting agencies are hereby superseded to the extent that they are inconsistent with this part 60-2.
NORTHERN SIERRA AIR QUAL ITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT GRETCHEN BENNITT, 

### APCO

D ISTRICT H EADQUARTERS T RUCKEE F IELD O FFICE Q UINCY F IELD O FFICE 200 Litton Drive, Suite 320 13450 Donner Pass Rd., Ste. B, Truckee, CA 96161 264 Hospital Rd. P.O. Box 2509 P.O. Box 9766, Truckee, CA 96162 P.O. Box 3981, Quincy, CA 95971 Grass Valley, CA 95945 (530) 550-7872 / FAX: ( 530) 587-2623 (530) 283-4654 / FAX: (530) 283-0699
(530) 274-9360 / FAX: (530) 274-7546 email: ryan@myairdistrict.com email: george@myairdistrict.com email: office@myairdistrict.com or www.myairdistrict.com

June 30, 2009



### Sean Hogan , Chief Air Quality Section US EPA Region IX

75 Hawthorne St. San Francisco, CA 94105-3901

ANNUAL SLAMS DATA CERTIFICATION

In accordance with 40 CFR Part 58.26, this letter certifies that the ambient air monitoring data for the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District contained in the Aerometric Information and Retrieval System/Air Quality Subsystem (AIRS/AQS) for the calendar year 2008, is complete and accurate. An AIRS/AQS SLAMS Data Generation Report (AMP275) will verify that all data for the criteria pollutants conforms to the applicable quality assurance requirements, air monitoring methodology, and air monitoring siting criteria given in 40 CFR Part 58. It is, to the best of my knowledge, complete and accurate

data.

I also authorize Norma Douglass to do anything with my data that she needs to do, in any way that she might choose to do it, for any reason that she might deem appropriate should she choose to do so ( because I trust Norma ).

SLAMS PM10 (85101 - when reported at local conditions) and PM2.5 (88101 - when reported at local conditions) data, though not reflected in a SLAMS Data Generation Report, were also complete and are accurate to the best of my knowledge.

Joseph Fish Deputy Air Pollution Control Officer

SERVING THE COUNTIES OF NEVADA, SIERRA AND PLUMAS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Financial Statements at December 31, 1998 (unaudited) and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1,000
<CURRENCY>                                U.S.DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                              2   
<SECURITIES>                                        0   
<RECEIVABLES>                                   1,668   
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (79)  
<INVENTORY>                                     4,250   
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                6,007   
<PP&E>                                          1,147   
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (417)   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  7,025    
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           1,747   
<BONDS>                                             0   
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0   
<PREFERRED>                                         0     
<COMMON>                                           66   
<OTHER-SE>                                          0    
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    7,025   
<SALES>                                        10,374   
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               10,374   
<CGS>                                           8,014   
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   8,014   
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                2,262   
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0      
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 81   
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (66)   
<INCOME-TAX>                                       17   
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (83)   
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0   
<CHANGES>                                           0   
<NET-INCOME>                                      (83)   
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.02)     
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)     
                                                       


</TABLE>