alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-                      -                        -                          -  General Disaster Information 
                        - How a Disaster Gets Declared
                        -  How a Disaster Gets Declared 
                        -  Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance 
                        -  Preliminary Damage Assessments 
                        -  Request For Presidential Disaster Declaration 
                        -  Individual Assistance Declaration Factors 
                        -  Search Your Location 
                        -  Disaster Authorities 
                        -  Historic Disasters 

# Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance

                            - English 

The Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 (SRIA) amended the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5121 et seq. (Stafford Act), to provide federally recognized Indian tribal governments (tribal governments) the option to request a Presidential emergency or major disaster declaration. FEMA is implementing this authority in three phases:
                        - Use of state regulations (January 29, 2013 - January 9, 2017):  To provide tribal governments the choice to use the authority provided by SRIA immediately following its enactment, FEMA began processing tribal declaration requests using state declaration regulations.  
                        - Pilot period (January 10, 2017 – TBD):  The release of the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance marks the official beginning of the pilot period for tribal declarations utilizing the guidance.
                        - Rulemaking:  Following the pilot period, FEMA will implement this authority through notice and comment rulemaking.
                        - Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance
                        - Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance - Cover Letter Template
                        - Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance - Fact Sheet
                        - Request for Presidential Declaration for Major Disaster or Emergency  -  FEMA Form 010-0-13
                        - New Recipients of Disaster Grants - Guide

Last updated January 3, 2024

Return to top
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7872

CLIFFORD ALLEN POWERS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

THOMAS MCBRIDE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater,

District Judge. (3:05-cv-00029-WCB-JE)

Submitted: March 5, 2007 Decided: March 13, 2007

Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clifford Allen Powers, Appellant Pro Se. Robert David Goldberg,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Clifford Allen Powers seeks to appeal the district

court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000)

petition and denying his motion to amend. The order is not

appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate

of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).

A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable

jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims

by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any

dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise

debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude Powers has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. 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. 

DISMISSED
fuel 

Formulation 

ID

fuel 

Subtype 

ID RVP

sulfur 

Level

ETOH 

Volume

MTBE 

Volume

ETBE 

Volume

TAME 

Volume

aromatic 

Content

olefin 

Content

benzene 

Content e200

3850 12 10 23.329 10 0 0 0 19.4554 11.12 0.6605 58.2972

3869 12 16 22.448 10 0 0 0 19.6138 11.12 0.5705 61.0491

3870 12 11.25 22.951 10 0 0 0 19.5233 11.12 0.62193 59.4766

3871 12 8.8 23.329 10 0 0 0 19.4554 11.12 0.6605 58.2972

3872 12 14.5 22.951 10 0 0 0 19.5233 11.12 0.62193 59.4766

3899 12 10.65 22.951 10 0 0 0 19.5233 11.12 0.62193 59.4766

20011 20 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
e300

BioDiesel 

Ester 

Volume

Cetane 

Index

PAH 

Content T50 T90

89.3116 0 0 0 182.883 300.72

92.2464 0 0 0 177.267 287.38

90.5694 0 0 0 180.476 295.003

89.3116 0 0 0 182.883 300.72

90.5694 0 0 0 180.476 295.003

90.5694 0 0 0 180.476 295.003

0 0 0 0 0 0
Before the First Division,

October 28, 1959

No. 63463.

protests 306930-K, etc. (Laredo).

#### Chester K. Stoner *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of carrizo baskets the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Chester K. Stoner*v. *United States*(42 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2083), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23-A


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement
of Zila, Inc. on Form S-3 of our report dated October 28, 1997, appearing in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Zila, Inc. for the year ended July 31, 1997 and to
the reference to us under the heading "Experts" in the Prospectus, which is part
of this Registration Statement.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
--------------------------
Deloitte & Touche LLP
Phoenix, Arizona

December 17, 1997
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

STATE OF DELAWARE, )

)

v. ) ID#s 1705004684 & 1705004742

)

KORI A. THOMAS, )

Defendant. )

Submitted: March 3, 2023

Decided: March 21, 2023

ORDER

Upon Defendant’s Amended Motion for Postconviction Relief - DENIED.

This 21st day of March, 2023, upon consideration of the Defendant’s Pro 

Se Amended Motion for Postconviction Relief,

1

the Commissioner’s Report and 

Recommendation that Defendant’s Amended Motion for Postconviction Relief 

should be DENIED,

2

and the Record in this case, it appears to the Court that:

(1) The Court referred this motion to a Superior Court Commissioner 

pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 512(b) and Super. Ct. Cr. R. 62 for proposed findings of 

fact and conclusions of law.

(2) The Commissioner has filed a Report and Recommendation that the 

Court deny the Defendant’s Amended Motion for Postconviction Relief.

1

1705004684, D.I. 65-69; 1705004742, D.I. 44-48.

2

1705004684, D.I. 84; 1705004742, D.I. 61.
-2-

(3) Neither party has filed an objection to the Commissioner’s Report and 

Recommendation.

NOW THEREFORE, after careful and de novo review of the record in this 

case, and for the reasons stated in the Commissioner’s Report and Recommendation 

dated March 3, 2023, the Court ADOPTS the Commissioner’s Report in its entirety 

and Defendant’s Amended Motion for Postconviction Relief is DENIED.

/s/ Jan R. Jurden

Jan R. Jurden, President Judge

Original: Prothonotary

cc: Hon. Janine M. Salomone 

Timothy G. Maguire, Esq., DAG

 Natalie S. Woloshin, Esq.

 Kori A. Thomas, pro se
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
 
   
     We consent to the use in this Amendment No 2 to Registration Statement No.
333-55917 of SuperShuttle International, Inc. on Form S-1 of our report on the
financial statements of SuperShuttle International, Inc. dated December 2, 1997
(March 31, 1998 with respect to certain information in Note 1 and July 10, 1998
as to Note 11), which expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an
explanatory paragraph relating to the restatement described in Note 11, our
report on the financial statements of Preferred Transportation, Inc. dba
SuperShuttle Orange County dated March 20, 1998, our report on the financial
statements of Tamarack Transportation, Inc. dba SuperShuttle Los Angeles dated
March 23, 1998, our report on the financial statements of Southern Shuttle
Services, Inc. dated March 17, 1998, and our report on the combined financial
statements of AAA Wheelchair Wagon Services, Inc. and Limousines of South
Florida, Inc., dated March 17, 1998, all appearing in the Prospectus, which is
part of such Registration Statement. The Financial Statements of SuperShuttle
International, Inc. for the year ended September 30, 1995 were audited by other
auditors.
    
 
     We also consent to the reference to us under the headings "Selected
Consolidated Financial Data" and "Experts" in such Prospectus.
 
Phoenix, Arizona
   
July 17, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          60,374
<SECURITIES>                                    24,017
<RECEIVABLES>                                   90,137
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,834
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               197,058
<PP&E>                                          22,209
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,558
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 225,922
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           59,213
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           417
<OTHER-SE>                                     166,292
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   225,922
<SALES>                                        155,346
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               155,346
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  157,044
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,627)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,846
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  69
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,986)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (235)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,751)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,751)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 312 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 312

   Expressing the sense of the Congress that the States should more 
 closely regulate title pawn transactions and outlaw the imposition of 
          usurious interest rates on title loans to consumers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 13, 2000

Mr. Shaw (for himself, Mrs. Meek of Florida, Mr. McCollum, Mr. Hastings 
 of Florida, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mrs. Thurman, Mr. Davis of Florida, and 
 Mr. Stearns) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
      referred to the Committee on Banking and Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing the sense of the Congress that the States should more 
 closely regulate title pawn transactions and outlaw the imposition of 
          usurious interest rates on title loans to consumers.

Whereas title loan lenders make title loans and title pawns to consumers by 
        attaining the consumer's automobile title as collateral;
Whereas these loans and pawns are often offered at unscrupulously high rates of 
        interest;
Whereas in many cases borrowers are forced to pay interest rates of up to 300 
        percent per year;
Whereas many of these borrowers are unaware of applicable rates and are forced 
        into deeper and deeper debt to pay the initial lien;
Whereas this industry takes advantage of uneducated and poor consumers through 
        usurious and exploitive lending practices;
Whereas title loans and title pawns threaten the ability of consumers to hold a 
        job since default on the loan or pawn will result in repossession and 
        sale of their car, which is often their only means of transportation to 
        and from work;
Whereas this industry is expanding rapidly throughout the United States;
Whereas the States have traditionally protected their citizens from usurious 
        lending and abusive credit practices;
Whereas a number of States have already resolved this problem on their own 
        without Federal intervention;
Whereas this problem is particularly acute in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, 
        Illinois, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New 
        Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, 
        and Utah; and
Whereas this problem has the potential to spread to other States that currently 
        do not closely regulate the title loan and title pawn industry: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that States should more closely 
regulate title pawn transactions and outlaw the imposition of usurious 
interest rates on title loans to consumers.
                                 <all>
```
Other references/citations 

From Table 2-2: 

Source: National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), 2008. Reducing CO2 Emissions by Improving the 

Efficiency of the Existing Coal-fired Power Plant Fleet, DOE/NETL-2008/1329. U.S. Department of Energy, 

National Energy Technology Laboratory, Pittsburgh, PA. July 23, 2008. Available at: 

<http://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analyses/pubs/CFPP%20Efficiency-FINAL.pdf>

Access unsuccessful at 6/5/2014 – not currently available. Recent reorganization of NETL online library apparently

omitted listing of this document. This widely cited 2008 reference is retained here and in the HR Partial 

Bibliography for future access when it is again available.
No. 53343.

protest 140912-K (New York).

#### Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
No. 62348.

#### Tacro, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 273983-K, etc. (New York),

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is composed wholly or in chief value of wood, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Case 3:06-cv-05343-RJB Document 7 Filed 08/02/06 Page 1 of 3
Case 3:06-cv-05343-RJB Document 7 Filed 08/02/06 Page 2 of 3
Case 3:06-cv-05343-RJB Document 7 Filed 08/02/06 Page 3 of 3
No. 55737.

protest 150038-K (Los Angeles).

#### Air Express International, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

From an examination of the papers in the case the court was unable to find any evidence sufficient to overcome the action of the collector, which was presumptively correct. The protest was therefore overruled.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMERICA SERVICE GROUP INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       6,227,000
<SECURITIES>                                   211,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,247,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (398,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            25,527,000
<PP&E>                                       6,685,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              (4,070,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              35,453,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,668,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        35,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,401,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                35,453,000
<SALES>                                    103,000,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           103,547,000
<CGS>                                       94,895,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              101,926,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,618,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   101,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,517,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,517,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.45<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.44<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Earnings per share has been restated as required by FAS #128, Earnings per 
Share.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0422

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

JACK ELDON JARVEY,

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 March 29, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 9 2021

02/09/2021

Case Number: DA 19-0422
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL - 1

(Proposed)

(James Robert Jackson; CR06-156RSM)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Ave., Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

(206) 553-1100

 JUDGE RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

JAMES ROBERT JACKSON,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR06-156RSM

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

THE COURT having considered the stipulated motion of the parties, the

records and files herein, the Court hereby makes the following findings:

1. Based on the facts set forth in the parties stipulated motion, the Court finds

that a failure to grant the continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time

necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence,

within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(ii).

2. The Court further finds that the ends of justice will be served by ordering a

continuance in this case, that a continuance is necessary to insure effective trial

preparation and that these factors outweigh the best interests of the public in a more

speedy trial, within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).

//

Case 2:06-cr-00156-RSM Document 31 Filed 10/19/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL - 2

(Proposed)

(James Robert Jackson; CR06-156RSM)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Ave., Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

(206) 553-1100

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the trial date for James Jackson is

extended from November 13, 2006, to December 11, 2006. Pretrial motions shall be

filed by November 15, 2006.

DONE this 19th day of October 2006.

A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented by:

s/Nancy Tenney 

WSBA No. 35304

Attorney for James Jackson

Federal Public Defender’s Office

1601 Fifth Ave., Suite 700

Seattle, WA 98101

206/553-1100

206/553-0120

nancy_tenney@fd.org

Case 2:06-cr-00156-RSM Document 31 Filed 10/19/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 61606.

#### Ameln Brothers, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 310875-K and 309756-K (Boston).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of sprats in oil, packed in tins, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Arnold Sorensin Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 199, C. D. 1862), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<PAGE>   1
                                 EXHIBIT NO. 11

                   STUART ENTERTAINMENT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
             STATEMENTS REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                (Amounts In Thousands, Except Per Share Amounts)
                                   (UNAUDITED)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                         Three Months Ended             Six Months Ended
                                                              June 30,                       June 30,
                                                       ----------------------        ----------------------
                                                        1999            1998          1999           1998
<S>                                                    <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
Shares of common stock outstanding at
  beginning of period (1)                                6,946          6,934          6,943          6,920
Weighted-average shares issued during the period             -              1              3             12
                                                       -------        -------        -------        -------
Actual weighted average share outstanding
  for the period                                         6,946          6,935          6,946          6,932
Dilutive stock options and warrants using
  average market price                                       -              -              -              -
                                                       -------        -------        -------        -------
Dilutive shares outstanding                              6,946          6,935          6,946          6,932
                                                       =======        =======        =======        =======
Net loss                                               $(5,496)       $(2,724)       $(8,612)       $(4,328)
                                                       =======        =======        =======        =======
Loss per share - basic and dilutive                    $ (0.79)       $ (0.39)       $ (1.24)       $ (0.62)
                                                       =======        =======        =======        =======
</TABLE>


(1)      This represents total outstanding shares of common stock less treasury
         shares.

See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.


                                       25