alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 47 (Monday, March 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11010-11011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4351]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-317-000]


Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

March 5, 2007.
    Take notice that on February 28, 2007, Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C 
(Guardian) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
First Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets attached to the filing, 
to become effective on April 1, 2007.
    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 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

[[Page 11011]]

docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#dc9a998e9f93b2b0b5b2b98fa9acacb3aea89cbab9aebff2bbb3aa"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1c5a594e5f5372707572794f696c6c736e685c7a796e7f327b736a">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-4351 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>
446 A.2d 669

#### Commonwealth v. Gregg, Appellant.

Submitted March 8, 1982.

Norman Ackerman, for appellant; Jane Cutler Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before WICKERSHAM, CIRILLO and LIPEZ, JJ.

Order affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7321

JOHN CARTER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ANGELA PICKNEY RUIZ, Hearing Officer; RUFUS E.

MINCEY; JOHN I. NICHOLS; BENJAMIN MONTGOMERY;

L. J. ALLEN; PARKER EVATT, in their individual

capacities,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-95-988-6-0AK)

Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Senn, STUCKEY & SENN,

Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record

and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's

recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

Appellant's motion to appoint counsel and affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. Carter v. Ruiz, No. CA-95-988-6-0AK (D.S.C.

July 26, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
1 

### Kelly, Shaheerah

From: Shane Young [SWyoung@spi-ind.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 6:47 AM

To: Kelly, Shaheerah

Subject: PSD Permit

Good morning Shaheerah,

Good news to hear our government is back open for business. I am looking forward to getting our PSD permit moving

again. As we have discussed before, this permit is an urgent matter for Sierra Pacific Industries. If there is anything you

need related to the permit please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best Regards

Shane Young

Sierra Pacific Industries

19758 Riverside Ave

Anderson Ca. 96007

P 530

‐ 378

‐ 8356

C 530

‐ 604

‐ 0025

swyoung@spi

‐ ind.com
EXHIBIT 32





Section 1350 Certifications







I, Andrew K. Walker, certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Allied Bancshares, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 containing financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Allied Bancshares, Inc.







|s/Andrew K. Walker
President and Chief Executive Officer
|--------------------------------------------------------





|Date:  August 15, 2005
|----------------------



I, Richard E. Bell, certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Allied Bancshares, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 containing financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Allied Bancshares, Inc.





|s/Richard E. Bell
Chief Accounting Officer and Chief Financial Officer
|----------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date:  August 15, 2005
|----------------------











16
----------------------------------------------------------------

Electronically Filed 

Supreme Court 

26517 

10-JAN-2011 

01:54 PM 

NO. 26517
 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
 

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,
 

vs.
 

RONALD G.S. AU, Respondent.
 

In re Application for Reinstatement of RONALD G.S. AU,


Petitioner.
 

(ODC 95-242-4701, ODC 97-213-5407, 98-064-5555)
 

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT
 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, J.,


Circuit Judge Crandall in place of Acoba, J., recused,


Circuit Judge Trader in place of Duffy, J., recused,


and Circuit Judge McKenna, assigned by reason of vacancy)
 

Upon consideration of the “Disciplinary Board’s Report
 

and Recommendation Denying Reinstatement of Ronald G.S. Au to the
 

Practice of Law,” the record, and the briefs of the parties, it
 

appears that Petitioner Au was suspended from the practice of law
 

for 5 years, effective July 22, 2005. It further appears that
 

during the period of suspension, Petitioner Au represented
 

himself and a company, Gourmet Delite, Inc., in arbitrating
 

issues concerning a business lease, a violation of Rule 2.17(a)
 
of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai'i. 

Petitioner Au was entitled to represent himself in the 

arbitration, but he could not represent Gourmet Delite, Inc. See 

Oahu Plumbing v. Kona Construction, Inc., 60 Haw. 372, 590 P.2d 

570 (1979) and ODC v. Gould, 119 Hawai'i 265, 195 P.3d 1197 

(2008). Petitioner Au’s arguments that his representation of 

Gourmet Delite, Inc. was authorized by HRS chapter 658A are 

without merit. In light of Petitioner Au’s practice while 

suspended, we see no need to address in detail the other points 

raised by him, and merely note we find them without merit. In 

light of the above, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner Au’s Petition for
 

Reinstatement is denied.
 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner Au may not seek
 

reinstatement before December 31, 2012. 


DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 10, 2011. 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
 

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
 

/s/ Virginia L. Crandall
 

/s/ Rom A. Trader
 

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
 

2
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

                    In the OTI Applicant Notice published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on December 28, 2006 (71 FR 78206) reference to the name of the Cane Freight, Inc. is corrected to read:                 

“Carie Freight, Inc.” 

Dated: March 2, 2007. 

Bryant L. VanBrakle, 

Secretary.

 [FR Doc. E7-4107 Filed 3-7-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
(LOGO) KPMG

345 Riverview
Suite 1O0
Wichita, KS 67203


Independent Accountants' Report

The Board of Directors
Farmers State Bank & Trust Co. of Superior:

We have examined management's  assertion about Farmers State Bank & Trust Co. of
Superior's (the Bank) compliance with the minimum servicing  standards set forth
in  the  Mortgage  Bankers  Association  of  America's  (MBA's)  Uniform  Single
Attestation  Program for Mortgage Bankers, as of and for the year ended December
31, 1999,  included in the  accompanying  management  assertion.  Management  is
responsible for the Bank's  compliance with those minimum  servicing  standards.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's  assertion about the
Bank's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test  basis,  evidence  about the  Bank's  compliance  with the
minimum  servicing   standards  and  performing  such  other  procedures  as  we
considered  necessary  in the  circumstances.  We believe  that our  examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a
legal  determination  on  the  Bank's  compliance  with  the  minimum  servicing
standards.

In our  opinion,  management's  assertion  that  the Bank  has  complied  in all
material respects with the aforementioned  minimum servicing standards as of and
for the year ended December 31, 1999 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

KPMG LLP
January 14, 2000
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
TippingPoint Technologies, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (No.
333-35146 and No. 333-68280), on Form S-8 of TippingPoint Technologies, Inc. of
our report dated March 15, 2002, related to the balance sheets of TippingPoint
Technologies, Inc. as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related statements
of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the years ended December
31, 2001 and 2000 and the period from January 12, 1999 through December 31,
1999, which report appears in the December 31, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K
of TippingPoint Technologies, Inc.

                                   /s/ KPMG LLP

March 27, 2002
Exhibit 32.1

CASH 4 HOMES 247Certifications

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

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

               1.             The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 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 operation of the Company as of and for the period covered in theReport.

By:/s/Gordon Forgey        Gordon Forgey, President and Chief FinancialOfficer

Date:       November 22, 2004
No. 64911.

#### Greig, Lawrence & Hoyt, Ltd. *v.*United States,

protest 31562-K (New York).

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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

27

28

1

DEFENDANT UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY’S MEDIATION BRIEF

Robert L. Zaletel, Esq. (SB# 096262)

McQUAID BEDFORD & VAN ZANDT LLP

221 Main Street, 16th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone: 415/905-0200

Facsimile: 415/905-0202

Attorneys for Defendant

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAIME D. ALVAREZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY and

DOES 1-100,

Defendants.

 /

Case No. CIV. S-04-2024 DFL JFM

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL WITH

PREJUDICE, AND ORDER THEREON

Pursuant to the settlement between the parties, they hereby stipulate through their

undersigned counsel that this action be dismissed with prejudice, each side to bear its own costs and

attorneys fees.

IT IS SO STIPULATED

Dated: July 25, 2005. McQUAID BEDFORD & VAN ZANDT, LLP

By: /s/ Robert L. Zaletel____________________ _

Robert L. Zaletel

Attorneys for Defendant

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

Dated: July 25, 2005. LEO F. DONAHUE, INC.

By: /s/ Leo F. Donahue 

Leo F. Donahue

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JAIME D. ALVAREZ

Case 2:04-cv-02024-DFL -JFM Document 13 Filed 08/04/05 Page 1 of 3
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

27

28

2

DEFENDANT UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY’S MEDIATION BRIEF

ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the action is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

DATED: August 3, 2005 /s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

U.S. District Judge 

For the Honorable David F. Levi

Case 2:04-cv-02024-DFL -JFM Document 13 Filed 08/04/05 Page 2 of 3
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

27

28

3

DEFENDANT UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY’S MEDIATION BRIEF

Case 2:04-cv-02024-DFL -JFM Document 13 Filed 08/04/05 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 American Home Mortgage Investment Corp. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen A. Hozie, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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 Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 10, 2007



/s/ Stephen A. HozieStephen A. HozieExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 7634

DERWIN PETERSON

,

Plaintiff

- Appellant

,

v.

COLONEL MELETIS, Superintendent; SERGEANT OUTLAND, Shift Sgt.; OFFICER BAKER, Post Officer

,

Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Rossie David Alston, Jr. , District Judge. ( 1:20

- cv

- 00753

- RDA

- MSN )

Submitted : January 20, 2022 Decided: January 25, 2022

Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Derwin Peterson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Derwin Peterson appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

action without prejudice for failure to comply with the court ’ s order directing him to file a

third amended complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). We review a district cour t ’ s dismissal

under Rule 41(b) for abuse of discretion. Attkisson v. Holder , 925 F.3d 606, 625 (4th Cir.

2019)

. We have reviewed the record and discern no abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we

affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, the undersigned officer of Lightspan, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

(1) the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 2003
(the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
as applicable, 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.

Dated: May 29, 2003                    /s/ John T. Kernan
                                       ---------------------
                                       John T. Kernan,
                                       Chairman of the Board
                                       and Chief Executive
                                       Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Lightspan, Inc. and will be retained by Lightspan, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Searched for **http://www.cms.gov/**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **http://www.cms.gov/**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4571 

To define ‘‘obscenity’’ for purposes of the Communications Act of 1934, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 18, 2024 

Mr. LEE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To define ‘‘obscenity’’ for purposes of the Communications 

Act of 1934, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Interstate Obscenity 

5 Definition Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINING OBSCENITY. 

7 (a) DEFINITION.— 

8 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 3 of the Commu9 nications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153) is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4571 IS

1 (A) by redesignating paragraphs (38) 

2 through (59) as paragraphs (39) through (60), 

3 respectively; and 

4 (B) by inserting after paragraph (37) the 

5 following: 

6 ‘‘(38) OBSCENE; OBSCENITY.— 

7 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘obscene’ or 

8 ‘obscenity’, when used in a manner or context 

9 that explicitly refers to, or could apply to, a pic10 ture, image, graphic image file, film, videotape, 

11 or other visual depiction, includes a picture, 

12 image, graphic image file, film, videotape, or 

13 other visual depiction that— 

14 ‘‘(i) taken as a whole, appeals to the 

15 prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excre16 tion; 

17 ‘‘(ii) depicts, describes, or represents, 

18 an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual 

19 contact, actual or simulated normal or per20 verted sexual acts, or lewd exhibition of the 

21 genitals, with the objective intent to 

22 arouse, titillate, or gratify the sexual de23 sires of a person; and 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 4571 IS

1 ‘‘(iii) taken as a whole, lacks serious 

2 literary, artistic, political, or scientific 

3 value. 

4 ‘‘(B) SEXUAL ACT; SEXUAL CONTACT.— 

5 For purposes of subparagraph (A), the terms 

6 ‘sexual act’ and ‘sexual contact’ have the mean7 ings given those terms in section 2246 of title 

8 18, United States Code.’’. 

9 (2) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMEND10 MENT.—Section 271(c)(1)(A) of the Communica11 tions Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 271(c)(1)(A)) is 

12 amended by striking ‘‘section 3(47)(A)’’ and insert13 ing ‘‘section 3(55)(A)’’. 

14 (b) OBSCENE OR HARASSING TELEPHONE CALLS IN

15 THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OR IN INTERSTATE OR FOR16 EIGN COMMUNICATIONS.—Section 223(a)(1)(A) of the 

17 Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 223(a)(1)(A)) is 

18 amended, in the undesignated matter following clause (ii), 

19 by striking ‘‘, with intent to abuse, threaten, or harass 

20 another person’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB