alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 17.10 Antenna structures over 304.80 meters (1,000 feet) in height. Where one or more antenna farm areas have been designated for a community or communities (see § 17.9), the Commission will not accept for filing an application to construct a new station or to increase height or change antenna location of an existing station proposing the erection of an antenna structure over 304.80 meters (1,000 feet) above ground unless: ( a ) It is proposed to locate the antenna structure in a designated antenna farm area, or
( b ) It is accompanied by a statement from the Federal Aviation Administration that the proposed structure will not constitute a menace to air navigation, or
( c ) It is accompanied by a request for waiver setting forth reasons sufficient, if true, to justify such a waiver.
[32 FR 8813, June 21, 1967, as amended at 42 FR 54824, Oct. 11, 1977; 61 FR 4363, Feb. 6, 1996]
1/21/2015

MARTINEZ, ROBE

This is to advise

file the original

OFgiCt^JvIQTJC^RWMTM'RT-eF-CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

•P.O: BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS78711

OFFICIAL BUSINE""* ^3PQ^

STATS ©F TEXAS

PENALTY FOR

PRWME 0 2 1M ^ PP=^0

0004279596 JAN22 2015

Ai~ki '-oRV.TWV"- MAILED FROM ZIP.CODf. 78 701 Ct. No. 307125 WR-33,162-1*

^denied^ without written order motion for leave to

Mandamus

_*tinezjr. 03113^?

'<Xes. YO*, «y-|£ # 1931397

&

Abel Acosta, Clerk

i
#### Charles J. SPIGNER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Geraldo MALDONADO, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 03-7740.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 11, 2004.

Decided March 18, 2004.

Charles J. Spigner, Appellant pro se.

*35Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Charles J. Spigner, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Spigner v. Maldonado,*No. CA-03-2769 (D.S.C. Oct. 21, 2003). 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.

*AFFIRMED*
No. 11-9159.

#### Starnes *v.*California.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.48
October 1, 1996

Celadon Group, Inc.
888 Seventh Avenue, Suite 402
New York, New York 10106

Gentlemen:

Reference is made to that certain warrant, dated August 1, 1990, as amended by
amendment No. 1 thereto, dated as of September 30, 1992, a letter agreement,
dated December 22, 1993 and a letter agreement, dated October 25, 1995 (the
"Warrant"), entitling International Bancshares Corporation ("IBC") to purchase
shares of common stock, par value $0.033 per share, of Celadon Group, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (the "Company"). Capitalized terms used herein and not
defined herein have the meanings ascribed to them in the warrant.

Your execution of this letter in the space provided below shall indicate the
Company's agreement with IBC that the Exercise Period of the Warrant shall be
amended to expire at 5:00 p.m., New York time, on November 1, 1997. Except as
hereby expressly amended, the terms and provisions of the Warrant remain in full
force and effect.

                                           Very truly yours,

                                           INTERNATIONAL BANCSHARES CORPORATION

                                           By: /s/ Dennis E. Nixon
                                               --------------------------------
                                               Dennis E. Nixon
                                               President

 Accepted and Agreed to by
 CELADON GROUP, INC.

By:/s/ Stephen Russell
   -------------------------
     Stephen Russell
     Chairman of the Board and
     Chief Executive Officer

                                       85








<PAGE>
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4577

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at 242 East Main Street in Bowling Green,

Kentucky, as the ‘‘William H. Natcher Federal Building

and United States Courthouse’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building and United States courthouse

5 located at 242 East Main Street in Bowling Green, Ken6 tucky, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘William H.

7 Natcher Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’.
2

•HR 4577 EH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

4 building and United States courthouse referred to in sec5 tion 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘William

6 H. Natcher Federal Building and United States Court7 house’’.

Passed the House of Representatives June 26, 1994.

Attest:

Clerk.

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4577

A BILL

To designate the Federal building and United

States Courthouse’’.liam H. Natcher Federal Building and UnitedStreet in Bowling Green, Kentucky, as the ‘‘WilStates courthouse located at 242 East Main
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO



18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO



SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jones Soda Co. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jennifer L. Cue, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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/ Jennifer L. Cue                                 |  |  |  | November 9, 2005
|Jennifer L. Cue                                     |  |  |  |                 
|Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer |  |  |  |
S90A0119.

#### THE STATE v. McCRARY.

(388 SE2d 682)

Weltner, Justice.

1. The trial court granted McCrary’s motion to set aside two of three sentences imposed for convictions of statutory rape, relying upon the rule enunciated in *LaPan v. State,*167 Ga. App. 250 (305 SE2d 858) (1983), as follows:

> The trial court erred in imposing separate sentences for each of the three convictions of rape. The three charges differed from one another only with respect to the averment of date, and in none of the three was the date made an essential element. Since all the dates alleged fall within the period of the statute of limitation, only one sentence can be imposed. [Id. at 253-4.]

The state appealed the trial court’s order, and the appeal was transferred to this court by the Court of Appeals, with the view that the case is in the nature of a petition for habeas corpus.1
      *State v. McCrary,*193 Ga. App. 11 (387 SE2d 10) (1989).

2. (a) The state urges in its appeal that the rule of *LaPan,*supra, should not be applied in prosecutions for multiple sexual assaults against child victims because of the impracticality of treating the dates specified in indictments as material averments.

(b) The victim of sexual assault in *LaPan,*supra, was also a child, and the trial court did not err in applying its rule in this case.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

*831Decided February 22, 1990.

*Willis B. Sparks, District Attorney, Thomas J. Matthews, Assistant District Attorney,*for appellant.

*James C. Bonner, Jr.,*for appellee.

The Court of Appeals relied upon *Sims v. State,*230 Ga. 589 (198 SE2d 298) (1973):

> The trial judge [in that case] properly treated the petition as one for habeas corpus, since a motion to set aside a verdict and judgment is not an appropriate remedy in this state in a criminal case. [Id. at 590.]

But see *McCranie v. State,*157 Ga. App. 110, 111 (276 SE2d 263) (1981): “[I]f the sentence imposed was a void sentence, then a new and valid sentence can be imposed by the trial judge at any time.”
October 21, 2014

Mr. Paul Gretch

Director, Office of International Aviation

United States Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: American Airlines’ Application for an Exemption

(Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas – Queretaro, Mexico)

(Docket DOT-OST-2014-0180)

Dear Mr. Gretch:

We have polled the air carriers on the attached service list regarding 

American Airlines’ Application for an Exemption (DFW-QRO). We received no 

objections.

Accordingly, we respectfully request expedited allocation of the Exemption 

requested in the Application.

Sincerely, 

Howard Kass

Vice President – Regulatory Affairs

Robert A. Wirick,

Managing Director, Regulatory and 

International Affairs

Abigail Donovan

Director, Congressional and Federal Affairs

1101 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036 (202) 326-5153 Fax: (202) 898-4810
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that, on October 21, 2014, I caused to be served a copy of the 

foregoing Letter by email upon those addressees listed below:

englets@state.gov (Department of State)

cristinasa@state.gov (Department of State)

paul.gretch@dot.gov (Department of Transportation)

brian.hedberg@dot.gov (Department of Transportation)

todd.homan@dot.gov (Department of Transportation)

peter.irvine@dot.gov (Department of Transportation)

laura.remo@dot.gov (Department of Transportation)

brett.kruger@dot.gov (Department of Transportation)

john.allen@faa.gov (Federal Aviation Administration)

dan.weiss@united.com (United)

steve.morrissey@united.com (United)

gmurphy@crowell.com (Counsel for United)

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com (Delta)

chris.walker@delta.com (Delta)

jhill@cooley.com (Counsel for JetBlue and Hawaiian)

perkmann@cooley.com (Counsel for JetBlue and Hawaiian)

robert.land@jetblue.com (JetBlue)

msinick@ssd.com (Counsel for Alaska)

jyoung@yklaw.com (Counsel for Spirit)

dkirstein@yklaw.com (Counsel for Spirit)

bob.kneisley@wnco.com (Southwest)

leslie.abbott@wnco.com (Southwest)

matwood@cozen.com (Counsel for Frontier)

stephen.lachter@lachterlaw.com (Counsel for Frontier)

ethan.blank@rjet.com (Republic)

robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com (Counsel for Republic)

patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com (Counsel for Republic)

john.fredericksen@suncountry.com (Sun Country)

thomas.ting@suncountry.com (Sun Country)

rpommer@atlasair.com (Atlas)

anita.mosner@hklaw.com (Counsel for UPS)

jennifer.nowak@hklaw.com (Counsel for UPS)

cefelts@fedex.com (FedEx)

nssparks@fedex.com (FedEx)

kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.com (Polar)

______________________

Abigail Donovan
§ 51.501 Scope. ( a ) The rules in this subpart apply to the pricing of network elements, interconnection, and methods of obtaining access to unbundled elements, including physical collocation and virtual collocation.
( b ) As used in this subpart, the term “element” includes network elements, interconnection, and methods of obtaining interconnection and access to unbundled elements.
| **Toll Free   1-866-4MUSTANGS** |
|-------------------------------------------|

|  |
|--|

| *UpdatedOctober 15, 2004* |  |
|---------------------------|--|

|  |
|--|

| ***Adopt a Living Legend;                 Wild, Beautiful, Adoptable***Unbranded and unclaimed free roaming horses on the public         lands in the western United States are protected and managed in accordance         with the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971. Excess animals         are offered to the general public for adoption.

**Adopt               a McCullough Peaks horse in November**

**Public Viewing at Britton Springs Admin. Site              Tuesdays & Thursdays -- 8 am to 12 noon              Wednesdays -- 4 to 7 pm**

•**Photo Gallery of Horses in HMA**•

**BLM Wyoming**

Schedule | Adoption         Info | Success Stories | Honor         Farm | Mantle Ranch | Facts         & FAQs | Docs | HMAsPhotos | News | Palm         Pilot Links | BLM         WH&B Program | Internet         Adoption

Search         | Browse | Home         | FAQs | Feedback

Created by BLM Wyoming

**Contact:****BLM Wyoming Info         Desk**

Please contact the wy_webteam         with any        questions relating to accessibility of documents.

www.wy.blm.gov/wildhorses

This is a US Government computer        system. Before continuing, please read        this Disclaimer         and our Privacy Policy. |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-79 -78 -77 -76 -75

39 40 41



### ★ ▲ ▲

▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 08/23 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 23 Aug 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.06 N 76.88 WMeters AGL
Editorial Note on Part 74
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 74 appear at 64 FR 4055, Jan. 27, 1999.

§ 74.720 Digital low power TV distributed transmission systems. ( a ) A digital low power TV or TV translator (LPTV) station may be authorized to operate multiple synchronized transmitters on its assigned channel to provide service consistent with the requirements of this section. Such operation is called a distributed transmission system (DTS). Except as expressly provided in this section, LPTV stations operating a DTS facility must comply with all rules in this part applicable to LPTV single-transmitter stations.
( b ) For purposes of compliance with this section, a digital LPTV station's “authorized facility” is the facility authorized for the station in a license or construction permit for non-DTS, single-transmitter-location operation. A digital LPTV station's “authorized service area” is defined as the area within its protected contour (described by § 74.792) as determined using the authorized facility.
( c ) The protected area for each DTS transmitter is determined based on the F(50,90) field strength given in § 74.792), calculated in accordance with § 73.625(b) of this chapter. The combined protected area of an LPTV DTS station is the logical union of the protected areas of all DTS transmitters, that falls within the station's authorized service area as defined in paragraph (b) of this section.
( d ) The DTS limiting area for each DTS transmitter is determined using the field strength from § 74.792 and the F(50,50) curves.
( e ) An application proposing use of DTS will not be accepted for filing unless it meets all of the following conditions: ( 1 ) The combined protected area covers all of the applicant's authorized service area;
( 2 ) Each DTS transmitter's LPTV DTS limiting contour falls within the authorized facility's LPTV DTS limiting contour;
( 3 ) Each DTS transmitter's protected area is contiguous with at least one other DTS transmitter's protected area;
( 4 ) The “combined field strength” of all DTS transmitters in a network does not cause interference to another station in excess of the criteria specified in § 74.793. The combined field strength at a given location is determined by a “root-sum-square” calculation, in which the combined field strength is equal to the square root of the sum of the squared field strengths from each transmitter in the DTS network at that location; and
( 5 ) Each DTS transmitter must be located within the station's authorized service area.
( f ) All transmitters operating under a single LPTV DTS license must follow the same digital broadcast television transmission standard.
[86 FR 21227, Apr. 22, 2021]
Exhibit
32.1     Section 1350 Certification




CERTIFICATE
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 North Central Bancshares, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David
M. Bradley, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:





1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));
      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 the dates and for the periods covered by the
  Report.





March
      27, 2009
              /s/ David M.
  BradleyDavid
      M. BradleyPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE:

JOE FEIJOO,

Relator. §

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 9

- 00314

- CR

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus against

the 205th District Court of El Paso County, Texas and concludes that Relator’s petition for writ of

mandamus should be denied. We therefore deny the petition for wr it of mandamus, in accordance

with the opinion of this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
#### § 80.1107 Test of radiotelephone station.

Unless the normal use of the required radiotelephone station demonstrates that the equipment is operating, a test communication on a required or working frequency must be made each day the ship is navigated. When this test is performed by a person other than the master and the equipment is found to be defective, the master must be promptly notified.

[76 FR 67617, Nov. 2, 2011]
Número Identificador

SEN 2 0 2 4

________________

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO

TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES

PANEL IV

SUCN. FAUSTINO APONTE

TORRES

Parte A pelante

v.

SUCN. SILVERIO CRUZ

BELTRÁN

Parte Apelada KLAN202400397 Apelación

procedente del

Tribunal de

Primera

Instancia, Sala

Superior de

Humacao

Civil Núm.:

HSCI201101233

Sobre:

Servidumbre de

paso

Panel integrado por su presidenta, la Jueza Cintrón Cintrón, la

Jueza Rivera Marchand y el Juez Rodríguez Flores.

SENTENCIA

En San Juan, Puerto Rico, a 30 de abril de 2024

.

Atendida la Moción Desistimiento sin Perjuicio presentada el 29

de abril de 2024, por la parte apelante, se declara la misma ha lugar

,

a tenor con la Regla 83(A) del Reglamento del Tribunal de

Apelaciones, 4 LPRA XXII

- B, R. 83(A). Por tanto, se ordena el archivo

definitivo de esta causa.

Notifíquese.

Lo acuerda y manda el Tribunal

, y lo certifica la Secretaria del

Tribunal de Apelaciones.

Lcda. Lilia M. Oquendo Solí s

Secreta ria del Tribunal de Apelaciones
Your session is about to expire.Resume session

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Welcome.Log inorregisterCOPS OFFICE RESOURCE CENTER

HomeCatalogCartOrders

                    

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                CatalogMatches: 1Offline form Recent Popular Online Print OtherCOPS-P257Prescription Drug Fraud and Misuse POP Guide, 2nd EditionPrescription Drug Fraud and Misuse, 2nd Edition, offers an updated description of the problem of prescription drug fraud and misuse and reviews some of the factors that increase the risks. It then identifies a series of questions to help you analyze your local problem. Finally, it reviews responses to the problem, and what is known about them from evaluative research and police practice.By Julie Wartell, Nancy G. La VigneCategories: Nonviolent Crime • POP Center ResourceLanguage: EnglishPublic linkhttps://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter?item=cops-p257Click here to see the entire catalog.Cart:Download PDFBook • Apr 2013Search catalogreset title abstract authors contentContaining text: exact phraseNot containing text: exact phraseLanguage:anyEnglishSpanishHmongVietnameseCategory:anyAlternatives to IncarcerationCommunity PartnershipsData and AnalysisEthics and IntegrityFoundations of Community PolicingHiring, Recruitment, and RetentionHomeland SecurityNew Immigrant CommunitiesNonviolent CrimeOtherPolice OperationsPOP Center ResourceSchool and Campus SafetyTechnologyTribalViolent CrimeYouth SafetyPublished after:Published before:Page1

                    

FOIA | No FEAR Act | Open Government | Privacy | Legal|HelpCopyright (C) U.S. Department of Justice, COPS Office, IT Division, 2012 - 2024. All rights reserved.
Rendered on Mon Mar 4 2024 at 02:19 (UTC-5) in 0.19 secEnterprise Framework 3.21.7.7 • Store Controls 3.3.1.7Survey 500303407 Section 60000560 Rules Hints Inactive
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D22-1193

LT Case No. 2021-CT-002759-A

_____________________________

JOHNNY ROMERO,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the County Court for Seminole County.

Wayne E. Culver, Judge.

Asad Ali, of Mandell Law P.A., Orlando, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Roberts J. 

Bradford, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for 

Appellee.

April 2, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

EDWARDS, C.J., and MAKAR and MACIVER, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
No. 11-158.

#### DiBlasio et al. *v.*Novello et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.