alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 47 (Monday, March 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11006-11007]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4399]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-337-000]


Columbia Gulf Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

March 6, 2007.
    Take notice that on March 1, 2007, Columbia Gulf Transmission 
Company (Columbia Gulf) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff 
sheets, with a proposed effective date of April 1, 2007:

Forty-second Revised Sheet No. 18
Thirtieth Revised Sheet No. 18A
Forty-third Revised Sheet No. 19

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to

[[Page 11007]]

the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice 
of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). 
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on 
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cc8a899e8f83a2a0a5a2a99fb9bcbca3beb88caaa9beafe2aba3ba"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="abedeef9e8e4c5c7c2c5cef8dedbdbc4d9dfebcdced9c885ccc4dd">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-4399 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Randy Leggett, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 349]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (DeLury, J.), rendered May 18, 1993, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree (two counts), and grand larceny in the fourth degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

*372Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We discern no error in the court’s modification of its *Sandoval*ruling *(see, People v Sandoval,*34 NY2d 371) to permit the prosecutor to cross-examine the defendant with respect to the previously-excluded circumstances surrounding his prior convictions. During his direct examination, the defendant discussed his prior acquittals in an attempt to mislead the jury into believing that whenever he had been arrested for robberies that occurred in the same neighborhood as in this case and by the same officer who assisted in his apprehension in this case he had been acquitted after trial, since in each of those cases he had been a victim of a police setup. Further, the defendant claimed that he had never been "anywhere near” the vicinity of the instant robbery, when in fact several prior convictions stemmed from robberies that took place in the subject vicinity. Accordingly, the defendant opened the door to cross-examination regarding his prior convictions and was "properly subject to impeachment by the prosecution’s use of the otherwise precluded evidence” *(People v Fardan,*82 NY2d 638, 646; *see also, People v Rodriguez,*85 NY2d 586; *People v Johnson,*203 AD2d 588; *People v Gordon,*202 AD2d 166). Moreover, following the cross-examination of the defendant, and again in its final charge, the court issued a limiting instruction cautioning the jury to consider the evidence of past crimes solely for the purpose of assessing the defendant’s credibility, thereby diminishing any prejudice arising therefrom *(see, People v Fardan, supra).*

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, without merit. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
Source:

Beck, M.B; Thompson, M; Ney, S; Gyawali, D; and Jeffrey, P. 2011. "On Governance for Re-engineering City Infrastructure." Proceedings 

of the Institution of Civil Engineers Engineering Sustainability, 2011, pp. 129-142 163(ES2)
#### Dealership Holdings, Inc., Appellant, v Dennis S. Griffin et al., Respondents.

[635 NYS2d 561]

—Order and judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme *998Court properly confirmed the Referee’s report. "A Referee’s determination is entitled to great weight, particularly in cases where the Referee, as trier of fact, must resolve conflicting testimony and matters of credibility” *(Bellnier v Bellnier,*158 AD2d 947, 948; *see, Zuckerman v Altman,*200 AD2d 520, *Iv denied*83 NY2d 756). The court properly rejected the objection that plaintiffs obligation to make payments pursuant to the Stock Purchase Agreement was conditioned upon the determination of the adjusted purchase price of the stock. That objection is contrary to the theory advanced at the trial before the Referee *(see, Pipe Welding Supply Co. v Haskell, Conner & Frost,*61 NY2d 884, 886). We agree with the court that the record supports the Referee’s determination that plaintiff is not entitled to credit for sums withdrawn from the Stock Payment Account, 50% of the net proceeds of used vehicle sales or salaries paid to defendants Griffin and Sorbini. (Appeal from Order and Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gorski, J.—Specific Performance.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Fallon, Doerr and Balio, JJ.
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID CHARLES THATCHER, No. 2:04-cv-2547-MCE-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

M. PENNER, ET AL., 

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local

Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On October 13, 2005, the magistrate judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff and which

contained notice to Plaintiff that any Objections to the Findings

and Recommendations were to be filed within ten (10) days. 

Plaintiff has not filed Objections to the Findings and

Recommendations.

Case 2:04-cv-02547-MCE -CMK Document 29 Filed 01/26/06 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

2

The Court has reviewed the file and finds the Findings and

Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the

magistrate judge's analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed October 13,

2005, are adopted in full;

2. The State of California’s Motion to Dismiss is denied;

3. Defendant California State Prison, Sacramento, is

dismissed sua sponte; and

4. This action now proceeds as against defendants Penner 

and Kernan only.

DATE: January 25, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-02547-MCE -CMK Document 29 Filed 01/26/06 Page 2 of 2
Before the Third Division,

April 28, 1955

No. 59017.

protests 174006-K, etc. (Detroit).

#### John V. Carr & Son, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beef similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Swift & Company et al.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 212, C. D. 1655), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
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 Cheviot Financial Corp. (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date of this Certification (the “Report”), I, Scott T. Smith, Chief Financial 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 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.
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Cheviot Financial Corporation and will be retained by Cheviot Financial Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 /s/Scott T. SmithScott T. SmithChief Financial Officer




Date:  November 14, 2011
A indicates modality was assumed in 

the overall function of the assay
Lines of Evidence Indicating Potential Interaction with the 

Androgen Pathway: Chemical A and J

Tier 1 battery assay Chemical A Chemical J

AR Binding (in vitro) Weak positive Weak positive

Hershberger

(Interrupted HPG + in vivo = ARmediated effects)

Positive 

(anti-androgen) Negative

Steroidogenesis

(in vitro, non-AR mediated 

effects)

Positive Positive

Male Rat

(AR, steroidogenesis, HPG axis) Negative Positive

2

Agency decision logic:

•Chemical A may interact with the AR in vivo

•Chemical J does not appear to interact with the AR in vivo

•Chemical A may interact with androgen pathway through receptormediated and non receptor-mediated effects

•Chemical J may interact with the androgen pathway through non 

receptor-mediated effects
APPLICANT KENNETH RAY JOHNSON APPLICATION NO. 78,231-05 

### APPLICATION FOR 11.07 WRIT OFHABEAS CORPUS ACTION TAKEN JUDGE DATE
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NICOLAS TRUJILLO,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2368 MCE GGH P

vs.

D. LORUSSO,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

On June 3, 2005, plaintiff filed a letter and “discovery and declaration of Nicolas

Arthur Trujillo.” These documents were not served on defendant. Plaintiff is advised that every

document submitted to the court for consideration must be served on defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P.

5. Documents not to be served electronically are usually served by placing a copy in the U.S.

mail. If an attorney has filed a document with the court on behalf of any defendant, then

documents submitted by plaintiff must be served on that attorney and not on the defendant. 

Every document submitted conventionally to the court (e.g., by a prisoner proceeding pro se)

must include a certificate stating the date an accurate copy of the document was mailed to

defendants or their attorney and the address to which it was mailed. See Local Rule 5-135(b) and

(c).

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02368-MCE -GGH Document 24 Filed 06/30/05 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s June 3, 2005 letter and

“discovery and declaration of Nicolas Arthur Trujillo” are disregarded. Plaintiff is cautioned that

failure to properly serve any documents subsequently filed in this action, and failure to include a

proper certificate of service with such filing, may result in a recommendation that this action be

dismissed.

DATED: 6/30/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:kf

truj2368.35(1) 

Case 2:04-cv-02368-MCE -GGH Document 24 Filed 06/30/05 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4228 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4228

 To redesignate the Cottonwood Visitor Center at Joshua Tree National 
        Park as the ``Senator Dianne Feinstein Visitor Center''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 1, 2024

Mr. Padilla (for himself and Ms. Butler) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To redesignate the Cottonwood Visitor Center at Joshua Tree National 
        Park as the ``Senator Dianne Feinstein Visitor Center''.

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

SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION OF THE COTTONWOOD VISITOR CENTER AT JOSHUA 
              TREE NATIONAL PARK AS THE ``SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN 
              VISITOR CENTER''.

    (a) Redesignation.--The Cottonwood Visitor Center at Joshua Tree 
National Park shall be known and designated as the ``Senator Dianne 
Feinstein Visitor Center''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the visitor center 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``Senator Dianne Feinstein Visitor Center''.
                                 <all>
```
No. 51002.

#### Protests 114456-K, etc., of W. F. Mackay (Pembina).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(14 Cust. Ct. 94, C. D. 919). In accordance therewith the claim for free entry was sustained.
Exhibit 32.1

CASH 4 HOMES 247

Certifications

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cash 4 Homes 247 (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,in the capacity indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

      1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      2.    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company as of and for the period covered in the Report.

                                 /s/Gordon Forgey                                 Gordon Forgey                                  President and Chief Financial Officer

Date: August 19, 2004
**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 ofCano Petroleum, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Michael J. Ricketts, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:

 

           (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

 
| May 16, 2005 |   |   | /s/ Michael J. Ricketts |   |
|--------------|--------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|         |   |   | Michael J. Ricketts     |   |
|         |   |   | Chief Financial Officer |   |
**EXHIBIT 32****WRITTEN STATEMENT 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 Jefferson-PilotCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for theperiod ending December 31, 2004 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), the undersigned, Dennis R. Glass, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, and Theresa M. Stone, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, tohis or her 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)     Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all    material respects, the financial condition and results of    operations of the Company.     /s/ Dennis R. Glass           Dennis R. Glass *Chief Executive Officer*March 15, 2005     /s/ Theresa M. Stone           Theresa M. Stone *Chief Financial Officer*March 15, 2005
E-30
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALLYN CHARPENTIER,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2616 GEB KJM P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS, 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has

filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local

General Order No. 262.

On May 18, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings

and recommendations herein which were served on petitioner and

which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to the

findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. 

Case 2:04-cv-02616-GEB -KJM Document 4 Filed 06/24/05 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

2

Petitioner has not filed objections to the findings and

recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings

and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the

magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 18,

2005, are adopted in full; and 

2. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas

corpus is dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies.

Dated: June 23, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02616-GEB -KJM Document 4 Filed 06/24/05 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 31.1
                                                                    ------------



                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Michael J. Grebe, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Interline Brands,
      Inc.;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report; and

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
      information included in this quarterly 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
      quarterly report.


Date: May 6, 2004                   By: /s/ Michael Grebe
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                        Michael J. Grebe
                                        President, Chief Executive Officer
                                        and Chief Operating Officer


                                      -29-
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMAS F. RISELEY,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2417 DFL JFM P 

vs.

WARDEN, PLEASANT 

VALLEY STATE PRISON,

Respondent. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed June 8, 2005, petitioner was ordered to file a motion to stay these

proceedings or file a request to voluntarily dismiss his sixth and seventh claims, as petitioner’s

application is a mixed petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims for relief. That

order was returned marked undeliverable. On June 16, 2005, the order was re-served to plaintiff

at his current address of record. On June 20, 2005, that order was returned marked

undeliverable, “inmate no longer at MCSP.” Thirty days from that re-service date have now

expired, and petitioner has not filed a motion to stay or a request to voluntarily dismiss his two

unexhausted claims or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

Although it appears from the file that petitioner’s copies of the order were

returned, petitioner was properly served. It is the petitioner’s responsibility to keep the court

Case 2:04-cv-02417-JKS-JFM Document 18 Filed 07/22/05 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

2

apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(f), service of

documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: July 21, 2005.

/001;rise2417.ftc

Case 2:04-cv-02417-JKS-JFM Document 18 Filed 07/22/05 Page 2 of 2