alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy Lee NIPPER, separately and as trustee for the Proprietor Property Trust, Defendant-Appellant, and Thomas Eugene Nipper, as trustee for the Proprietor Property Trust and as nominee of Timothy Lee Nipper; Mellon Mortgage Company, as mortgagee, Defendants.

No. 03-5094.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

May 17, 2004.

*182David English Carmack, Carol A. Barthel, Evan J. Davis, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Timothy Lee Nipper, Tulsa, OK, pro se.

Thomas Eugene Nipper, Tulsa, OK, pro se.

Before LUCERO, McKAY, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judge.

Timothy Lee Nipper appeals from two rulings of the district court in the underlying case brought by the United States to reduce tax assessments against appellant to judgment and set aside a real property conveyance so as to foreclose upon it. First, he challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to strike all deposition testimony elicited from his former wife, Dawn Lynn Lang, as violative of the marital confidential communications privilege. Second, he challenges the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the government. He argues that the government presented insufficient evidence to support its assessments for tax years 1981 through 1985. We have jurisdiction over this appeal by virtue of 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

We review the district court’s ruling on the motion to strike Ms. Lang’s deposition testimony for abuse of discretion, *see Lighton v. Univ. of Utah,*209 F.3d 1213, 1227 (10th Cir.2000). However, we review the district court’s application of the law respecting the marital confidential communications privilege *de novo. See Conkle v. Potter,*352 F.3d 1333, 1335 n. 4 (10th Cir.2003). We also review the grant of summary judgment *de novo,*applying the same standards as did the district court in determining whether the government provided the minimal evidentiary foundation required to support the tax assessments. *See Mann v. United States,*204 F.3d 1012, 1015-16 (10th Cir.2000); *United States v. McMullin,*948 F.2d 1188, *1831192 (10th Cir.1991). Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs in light of these standards and the applicable law, we conclude that the district court’s rulings were correct. For substantially the same reasons contained in the district court’s orders, dated February 3, 2003, and March 25, 2003, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
Editorial Note on Part 154
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 154.438 Design vapor pressure. ( a ) If the surface of an independent tank type A are mostly flat surfaces, the Po must not exceed 69 kPa gauge (10 psig).
( b ) If the surfaces of an independent tank type A are formed by bodies of revolution, the design calculation of the Po must be specially approved by the Commandant (CG-ENG).
[CGD 74-289, 44 FR 26009, May 3, 1979, as amended by CGD 82-063b, 48 FR 4782, Feb. 3, 1983; USCG-2014-0688, 79 FR 58284, Sept. 29, 2014]
Presidential Documents

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Presidential Documents 17787 

Proclamation 8121 of April 5, 2007 

National Former Prisoner of War Recognition Day, 2007 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

The men and women of the United States Armed Forces have made great 

sacrifices to defend our Nation. They have triumphed over brutal enemies, 

liberated continents, and answered the prayers of millions around the globe. 

On National Former Prisoner of War Recognition Day, we honor the brave 

individuals who put service above self and were taken captive while protecting America and advancing the cause of freedom. 

Throughout our Nation’s conflicts, American prisoners of war have defied 

ruthless enemies and endured tremendous hardships as they braved captivity. 

Their strength showed the power and resilience of the American spirit 

and the indomitable character of our men and women in uniform. Their 

sacrifices are a great example of courage, devotion, and love of country. 

Our Nation’s former prisoners of war have helped secure the priceless gift 

of freedom for all our citizens, and we will always be grateful to them 

and their families. On National Former Prisoner of War Recognition Day 

and throughout the year, we honor the American heroes who have been 

taken as prisoners of war and remember their legacy of bravery and selflessness. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States 

of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution 

and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 9, 2007, as National 

Former Prisoner of War Recognition Day. I call upon the people of the 

United States to join me in honoring the service and sacrifices of all American 

prisoners of war. I call upon Federal, State, and local government officials 

and private organizations to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies 

and activities. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES_3
17788 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Presidential Documents 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifth day of 

April, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence 

of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first. 

[FR Doc. 07–1776 

Filed 4–6–07; 8:47 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES_3GWBOLD.EPS</GPH>
§ 120.310 Power sources. ( a ) ( 1 ) Each vessel that relies on electricity to power the following loads must be arranged so that the loads can be energized from two sources of electricity: ( i ) The vital systems listed in § 119.710 of this chapter;
( ii ) Interior lighting except for decorative lights;
( iii ) Communication systems including a public address system required under § 121.610 of this chapter; and
( iv ) Navigation equipment and lights.
( 2 ) Except as provided in § 120.312 of this part, a vessel with batteries of adequate capacity to supply the loads specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section for three hours, and a generator or alternator driven by a propulsion engine, complies with the requirement in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( b ) Where a ship service generator driven by a propulsion engine is used as a source of electrical power, a vessel speed change, throttle movement or change in direction of the propeller shaft rotation must not interrupt power to any of the loads specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

FRANKLIN PIGGIE, DOC #H46388, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4001 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ________________________________ ) Opinion filed March 9, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Neil A. Roddenbery, Judge. Franklin Piggie, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
VILLANTI, SLEET, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
§ 139.150 Revocation of approval. ( a ) The Coast Guard may revoke the approval of a TPO if the organization has demonstrated a pattern or history of: ( 1 ) Failure to comply with this part;
( 2 ) Substantial deviations from the terms of the approval granted under this part; or
( 3 ) Failures, including ethical violations, conflicts of interest, or inadequate performance, that indicate to the Coast Guard that the TPO is no longer capable of carrying out its duties as a TPO.
( b ) If the Coast Guard seeks to revoke the approval of a TPO, it must: ( 1 ) Notify the TPO in writing of the intention to revoke the approval;
( 2 ) Provide the details of the TPO's demonstrated pattern or history of actions described in paragraph (a) of this section; and
( 3 ) Advise the TPO that it may appeal this decision to the Coast Guard in accordance with the provisions of 46 CFR subpart 1.03.
Opinion issued February 12, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-18-01108-CV

———————————

NEWPARK DRILLING FLUIDS, LLC, Appellant

V.

FORTITUDE ENERGY, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 269th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2015-57336

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Newpark Drilling Fluids, LLC, has filed a motion to dismiss this

appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Although appellant’s motion does not 

contain a certificate of conference, it contains a certificate of service on counsel for 

appellee, the motion has been on file with this Court for more than ten days, and no 
2

response has been filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5(d), (e), 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a)(2). No 

other party has filed a notice of appeal and no opinion has issued. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.1(a)(1), (c).

Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. 

P. 42.1(a)(1), (d), 43.2(f). We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Landau.
Editorial Note on Part 153
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 153 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50465, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 153.1118 Prewash of Categories B and C cargo tanks not meeting stripping standards: Categories B and C. ( a ) Unless § 153.1114 allows the prewash to be omitted, a cargo tank from which a Category B NLS is unloaded must be prewashed using the procedures in § 153.1120(b) if the tank— ( 1 ) Operates under the interim standard in § 153.481(b); or
( 2 ) Has a waiver issued under § 153.483.
( b ) Unless § 153.1114 allows the prewash to be omitted, a cargo tank from which a Category C NLS is unloaded must be prewashed using the procedures in § 153.1120(b) if the tank has a waiver issued under § 153.483.
EXHIBIT 32.1   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
------------   OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Long Island Financial Corp., (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Douglas
C. Manditch, President & Chief Executive 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:

(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 results of operations of the Company.


                                          /s/ Douglas C. Manditch
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Douglas C. Manditch
                                          President & Chief Executive Officer
                                          August 15, 2005
NEWS FROM... 808920183 @:

FEDERAL ELECTION
COMMISSION

. 1325 K Street,

RELEASE: ON RECEIPT CONTACT: DAVID FISK

CORRECTED RELEASE - SUBSTITUTE FOR RELEASE OF MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1978 SUSAN TIF
(202) 523-4065

_ FEC RELEASES INDEX ON —
LABOR-RELATED POLITICAL COMMITTEES

WASHINGTON-February 9 - A recently-released FEC study of receipts and expenditures by labor-
related political committees during the 1976 elections shows that the largest labor committees
spent $8.2 million in contributions to or expenditures on behalf of federal candidates.

The 42 labor committees, representing those committees which raised and/or spent more thal

$100,000, reported total adjusted receipts during 1975-1976 of $14.9 million, and total adjust

expenditures during 1975-1976 of 14.2 million.
All 303 political committees included in the FEC study reported total adjusted receipts

during 1975-1976 of $18.6 million, and total adjusted expenditures of $17.5 million.

The FEC "adjusted" the reported figures to exclude transfers of funds between affiliated
committees.

In addition to direct contributions to federal candidates or expenditures on behalf of
federal candidates ($8.2 million), the adjusted expenditure figures ($14.2 million and $17.5
million) may include spending for the following items: fund-raising costs to raise money for
the PAC, staff salaries and other operating expenditures of the PAC, legal and accounting
expenditures, contributions to state and local candidates, contributions to national, state,
or local political party committees, and other miscellaneous activities of the PAC not direct;
related to federal elections or federal candidates.

NOTE: The FEC noted today that its earlier press release, dated Monday, February 6, was

misleading in emphasizing in the second paragraph that labor committees had spent more than $24

million, Thie was the "grecel fsgure, and ‘meludes the tranefers between affiliated . ar

committees. The introduction to the FEC study said, "Because funds were often transferred be

tween political committees, gross receipts and expenditures are inflated figures. Removing

these transfers creates a total adjusted expenditure of $17,488,650."

The FEC study said, "Concentrated attention has been given to those committees which
reported receiving or expending in excess of $100,000 during this. time. White.these
committees reflect only 13.9% of the total number of labor-related politica’
they account for 83.6% of the total amount expended by all of the labor-rel.
committees," the study said. ,

-30-
Exhibit 32.2

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 Quarterly Report of Capitol City Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Tatina Brooks, Principal Financial and Accounting 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; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Tatina BrooksTatina Brooks, Senior Vice President of Accounting and Financial Reporting (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)


May 24, 2010
CERTIFICATIONS

         I, Laurie Brewis certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB
of Redhand International, Inc.

         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 officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-
14) for the registrant and have:

                  a) Designed such disclosure controls and
procedures 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 as of a date
within 90 days prior to the filing date of this report
(the "Evaluation Date"); and

                  c) Presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

         5. The registrant`s other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, 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 in the design
or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect
the registrant`s ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial data and have identified for the registrant`s auditors
any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

                  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrant`s internal controls.

         6. The registrant`s other certifying officers and I have
indicated in this report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of
our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

March 17, 2006
                                   By:    /s/ Laurie Brewis
                                         ------------------------------
                                             Laurie Brewis
                                             Chief Executive Officer

<PAGE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Citizens First Financial Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, C.
William Landefeld, Chief Executive Officer 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:

     (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 results of
              operations of the Company.

/s/      C. William Landefeld
--------------------------------
         C. William Landefeld
         Chief Executive Officer
         March 28, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Citizens First Financial Corp. and will be retained by Citizens
First Financial Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
**21**
**st**

**      Century Holding Company**

**EXHIBIT        32.1**

| (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 results of operations of                21st                Century Holding Company. |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                        |   |   |                                       |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
| By:                  */s/                  Edward J. Lawson*                |   |   |                                            |
| **Edward                J. Lawson, Chief Executive                Officer** |   |   |  **August 11,                  2006** |

----

**   **
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:FAA-2011-0305; Dir ID 2010-NM-186-AD
# C_2010255EN.01013201.xml

| 22.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/132 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/132

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the radio interference (electromagnetic compatibility) of vehicles (codified version)’

COM(2009) 546 final — 2009/0154 (COD)

(2010/C 255/24)

On 9 November 2009 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the radio interference (electromagnetic compatibility) of vehicles

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the radio interference (electromagnetic compatibility) of vehicles

COM(2009) 546 final – 2009/0154 (COD).

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 458th plenary session of 16 and 17 December 2009 (meeting of 16 December 2009), by 179 votes, with two abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 16 December 2009.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Mario SEPI

---