alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 16 (Thursday, January 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 3416]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-314]



[[Page 3416]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--National Biodiesel Accreditation Commission

    Notice is hereby given that, on January 3, 2007, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), National Biodiesel 
Accreditation Commission (``NBAC'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing additions or change to it standards development 
activities. the notifications were filed for the purpose of extending 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damage under specified circumstances. Specifically, NBAC has 
amended various aspects of its BQ-9000 standard in several ways, 
including but not limited to: Lengthening the certification period; 
requiring an annual surveillance audit; requiring six months of full 
operation before an applicant may apply; amending the requirements of a 
desk audit; requiring the applicant to maintain a Document Status form; 
to track amendments to applicant's Quality Manual; lengthening the 
period of required recordkeeping; and separating the marketer and 
producer standards.
    On August 27, 2004, NBAC filed its original notification pursuant 
to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a 
notice in Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the act on 
October 4, 2004 (69 FR 59269).

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 07-314 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
98-2312.

#### State ex rel. Haynes v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.

In Prohibition. *Sua sponte,*cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 91

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 91 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59779, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 91.25-35 Marine engineering equipment.

(a) For inspection procedures of marine engineering equipment and systems, see subchapter F (Marine Engineering) of this chapter.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7363

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TORRANCE JONES, a/k/a Tube, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CR-96-79-BO) Submitted: February 23, 1999 Decided: May 21, 1999 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Torrance Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Christine Blaise Hamilton, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on May 28, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on June 4, 1998. Pursuant to Rule 4(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. 2 PER CURIAM: Torrance Jones filed an untimely notice of appeal from the district court’s denial of his post-judgment motion to correct an alleged error in the transcript of his criminal trial. A defendant in a criminal action is accorded ten days from entry of the judgment or order being appealed within which to file a notice of appeal in the district court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A); cf. United States v. Kress , 944 F.2d 155, 161 (3d Cir. 1991) (applying ten-day appeal period to district court’s order denying Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 motion). The district court may extend this appeal period only upon a finding of excusable neglect or good cause. An extension of time may not exceed thirty days from the expiration of the time otherwise prescribed. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4). The district court entered its order on June 4, 1998; * Jones’ notice of appeal was given to prison officials for mailing, and thus deemed filed, on September 9, 1998. Jones failed to file atimely notice of appeal or obtain an extension. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts3 and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Editorial Note on Part 8
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 8 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49224, Sept. 25, 2009.

§ 8.410 Applicability. This subpart applies to: ( a ) Recognized classification societies; and
( b ) U.S. flag vessels that are certificated for international voyages and are classed by a recognized classification society that is authorized by the Coast Guard to participate in the Alternate Compliance Program (ACP) as specified in this subpart and whose vessel type is authorized to participate in the ACP per the applicable subchapter of 46 CFR chapter I.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Independence Holding Company Form 10-Q for the nine months ended September 30,
2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                       366,618,000
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                  24,599,000
<MORTGAGE>                                      26,000
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                             478,594,000
<CASH>                                      10,533,000
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                         141,609,000
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                      27,831,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             696,867,000
<POLICY-LOSSES>                            293,731,000
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                         23,780,000
<POLICY-OTHER>                             174,951,000
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                        4,859,000
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                             15,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,898,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 108,661,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               696,867,000
<PREMIUMS>                                  65,506,000
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                         27,072,000
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                           (365,000)
<OTHER-INCOME>                               4,002,000
<BENEFITS>                                  50,775,000
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                  4,681,000
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                                 0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             13,570,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,440,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          9,130,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 9,130,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.14
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
§ 1.15 OST structure. ( a ) *Secretary and Deputy Secretary.* The Secretary and Deputy Secretary are assisted by the following, all of which report directly to the Secretary: ( 1 ) The Chief of Staff;
( 2 ) The Executive Secretariat;
( 3 ) The Departmental Office of Civil Rights;
( 4 ) The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization;
( 5 ) The Office of Intelligence, Security and Emergency Response;
( 6 ) The Office of Public Affairs;
( 7 ) The Office of the Chief Information Officer; and
( 8 ) The Office of Drug & Alcohol Policy & Compliance.
( b ) The Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy, the General Counsel, and the Assistant Secretaries for Administration, Budget and Programs, and Governmental Affairs also report directly to the Secretary.
( c ) *Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy.* This Office is composed of: ( 1 ) The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, which includes: ( i ) The Office of Policy Development, Strategic Planning and Performance;
( ii ) The Office of Infrastructure Finance and Innovation; and
( iii ) The Office of the Chief Economist.
( 2 ) The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs, which includes: ( i ) The Office of International Transportation and Trade;
( ii ) The Office of International Aviation; and
( iii ) The Office of Aviation Analysis.
( d ) *Office of the General Counsel.* This Office is composed of: ( 1 ) The Office of General Law;
( 2 ) The Office of International Law;
( 3 ) The Office of Litigation;
( 4 ) The Office of Legislation;
( 5 ) The Office of Regulation and Enforcement;
( 6 ) The Office of Operations, which includes the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Office;
( 7 ) The Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, which includes the Aviation Consumer Protection Division; and
( 8 ) The Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution.
( e ) *Office of the Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs.* This Office is composed of: ( 1 ) The Office of Budget and Program Performance;
( 2 ) The Office of Financial Management;
( 3 ) The Office of the Chief Financial Officer for the Office of the Secretary; and
( 4 ) The Office of Credit Oversight and Risk Management.
( f ) *Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs.* This Office contains the following functional areas: Congressional Affairs and Intergovernmental Affairs; and includes a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tribal Government Affairs.
( g ) *Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.* This Office is composed of: ( 1 ) The Office of Audit Relations;
( 2 ) The Office of Human Resource Management;
( 3 ) The Office of Hearings;
( 4 ) The Office of Security;
( 5 ) The Office of the Senior Procurement Executive;
( 6 ) The Office of Financial Management and Transit Benefit Programs; and
( 7 ) The Office of Facilities, Information and Asset Management.
#### Quinby, Plaintiff in Error, v. Tedford, Defendant in Error.

1. Immaterial Error.

While the established rules should be adhered to in the examination of witnesses, a slight departure or trivial error is not ground for reversal, particularly when the case is tried to the court.

2. Practice.

The finding of the trial court, when supported by evidence, will not be disturbed.

*Error to the District Court of Arapahoe County.*

Mr. Milton Smith and. Mr. W. T. Rogers, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Bartels & Blood, for defendant in error.

Reed, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Suit was brought by plaintiff in error to recover commissions alleged to have been earned in the sale of a property by the defendant to one Rose. The commission claimed was $600. The suit was originally brought in the county court, a trial had to the judge, a jury being waived, resulting in a judgment for the plaintiff for $200. An appeal was taken to the district court, where the trial was also had to the judge resulting in'a judgment for the defendant, from which this appeal is prosecuted.

Aside from the general assignment of error, that the court erred in finding for the defendant, several special errors are assigned upon questions asked and the'rulings of the court and the admission and rejection -of evidence. These supposed errors appear more technical than substantial, and of a character that could in no way materially affect the result or the parties. While it is well, at all times, in the trial of a cause to adhere in the examination of witnesses to well established *211rules, a slight departure and trivial error is not ground for reversal, particularly when the case is tried to the court.

The other assignments are, in effect, that the court erred in its finding of facts.

The trial appears to have been quite lengthy; much contradictory and irreconcilable evidence was taken, from which the court, apparently, deduced the fact that, within the law as laid down by the supreme court and this court, the plaintiff failed to show that he had earned the fee for which he was prosecuting. It was not claimed that plaintiff made the sale. It was conceded that defendant himself made it, but it was claimed that plaintiff brought the parties together, and found a purchaser able and willing to buy, who did buy the property.

On the part of the defendant there was evidence tending to show that prior to the intervention of plaintiff defendant was negotiating a sale, or attempting to, to the purchaser, through his son who was also engaged in the business of a real estate broker.

It is evident that the court concluded that the sale did not result from the services of the plaintiff, and such finding has evidence in its support.

This class of cases has been so numerous, that they have become rather monotonous. The law has been so well defined and so often stated that a repetition is unnecessary. District courts can hardly err in its application.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending February 21, 2009

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for Second Quarter of 2009 (April 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
 AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.
 ACTION: List of applications delayed more than 180 days.
 SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5117(c), PHMSA is publishing the following list of special permit applications that have been in process for 180 days or more. The reason(s) for delay and the expected completion date for action on each application is provided in association with each identified application.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Delmer Billings, Office of Hazardous Materials Special Permits and Approvals, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, East Building, PHH-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue Southeast, Washington, DC 20590-0001, (202) 366-4535. Key to “Reason for Delay” 1. Awaiting additional information from applicant. 2. Extensive public comment under review. 3. Application is technically complex and is of significant impact or precedent-setting and requires extensive analysis. 4. Staff review delayed by other priority issues or volume of special permit applications. Meaning of Application Number Suffixes N—New application. M—Modification request. PM—Party to application with modification request. Issued in Washington, DC, on June 13, 2007. Delmer Billings, Director, Special Permits & Approval Programs, Office of Hazardous Materials, Special Permits & Approvals.
 Application No.
Applicant
Reason for delay
Estimated date of completion**Modification to Special Permits**10481-M
M-1 Engineering Limited, Bradfrod, West Yorkshire
4
07-31-200714167-M
Trinityrail, Dallas, TX
1,3,4
09-30-200712574-M
Weldship Corporation, Bethlehem, PA
4
07-31-200712574-M
Luxfer Gas Cylinders, Riverside, CA
4
07-31-2007**New Special Permit Applications**14385-N
Kansas City Southern Railway Company, Kansas City, MO
4
09-30-200714453-N
FIBA Technologies, Inc., Westboro, MA
4
07-31-200714452-N
Martek Biosciences Corporation, Winchester, KY
4
07-31-200714442-N
Trinityrail, Dallas, TX
4
09-30-200714436-N
BNSF Railway Company, Topeka, KS
4
09-30-200714402-N
Lincoln Composites, Lincoln, NE
1
12-31-2007


[FR Doc. 07-3022 Filed 6-19-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-60-M
#### Agnes Ann Gallup, Respondent, *v.*Sherman S. Jewett and others, Appellants.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Mem. by

Learned, P. J.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Aviation Administration

          - 14 CFR Part 71
          - [Docket No. FAA-2007-27678; Airspace Docket No. 07-ACE-3]

# AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

# SUMMARY:

This document confirms the effective date of the direct final rule which revises Class E airspace at Monticello, IA.

# DATE:

Effective Date: 0901 UTC, July 5, 2007.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Grant Nichols, System Support, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: (816) 329-2522.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The FAA published this direct final rule with a request for comments in the                     **Federal Register**                     on May 16, 2007 (72 FR 27415). The FAA uses the direct final                           ( print page 33645)                        rulemaking procedure for a non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would become effective on July 5, 2007. No adverse comments were received, and thus this notice confirms that this direct final rule will become effective on that date.                

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas on June 4, 2007.

Walter Tweedy,

Manager, System Support Group, ATO Central Service Area.

[FR Doc. 07-2994 Filed 6-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
§ 72.05-30 Windows and airports. ( a ) For the purpose of this subpart, all glass in windows or airports shall be at least 1 ⁄ 4 inch thick. However, greater thickness may be required for strength purposes in certain locations. All glass shall be fitted in steel or equivalent metal frames and shall be retained by steel or equivalent metal glazing beads or angles.
( b ) Where wire-inserted glass is required, and the single wire type is employed, the strands shall run horizontally and shall be not more than 2 inches apart.
( c ) Windows in Class B-0 bulkheads shall be fitted with wire inserted glass. Such windows opening onto passageways may not extend below the normal height of the storm rails.
( d ) Windows in Class B-15 bulkheads shall be fitted with wire inserted glass. In addition, such windows shall be fitted with a suitable steel or equivalent metal shutter capable of being operated manually as well as automatically by means of a fusible link.
( e ) Windows in interior “A” Class bulkheads shall be fitted with suitable steel or equivalent metal shutter capable of being operated manually as well as automatically from the control station by the same system used for the fire doors as noted in § 72.05-25(b)(9)(ii). The metal shutter shall be insulated to meet the applicable bulkhead requirements.
( f ) Windows or air ports opening onto lifeboat embarkation or lowering spaces from service, cargo, or machinery spaces, or from control or accommodation spaces other than those containing only incombustible veneers and trim and fire resistant furnishings, shall be fitted with wire inserted glass. Other windows or air ports opening onto open decks or enclosed promenades need not have wire inserted glass.
( g ) Skylights to spaces containing auxiliary internal combustion machinery having an aggregate horsepower of 1,000 or more, and to boiler and main enginerooms, shall be capable of being closed from outside the space. If glass is fitted in such skylights, it shall be of the wire inserted type. The glass panels shall be fitted with permanently attached shutters of steel or equivalent metal.
#### § 69.163 Under-deck tonnage.

The under-deck tonnage provisions in § 69.109 apply; except that, under this subpart, spaces between the line of the tonnage deck and the tonnage deck itself due to a stepped tonnage deck are included in under-deck tonnage.

[CGD 87-015b, 54 FR 37657, Sept. 12, 1989, as amended by USCG-2011-0522, 81 FR 18731, Mar. 31, 2016]