alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| (1)           | the      quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Debut Broadcasting Corporation Inc. for      the quarter ended June 30, 2009 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 quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter      ended June 30, 2009, fairly presents in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of Debut Broadcasting      Corporation Inc. |
|-----------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | By:                             | /s/      Ronald Heineman                     |   |
|--------|---------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                            | Name: Ronald      Heineman              |   |
|   |                            | Title: Principal Executive      Officer |   |
|   |                            |                                         |   |
|   | Date: August 13,      2010 |                                         |

|   |                            |                                         |   |
|--------|---------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | By:                             | /s/      Sariah Hopkins                      |   |
|   |                            | Name: Sariah    Hopkins                 |   |
|   |                            | Title: Principal Financial      Officer |   |
|   |                            |                                         |   |
|   | Date: August 13,      2010 |                                         |

----
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Motorvehicle use map. Colville National Forest, northeast area, Washington**
 
2011 | 2013| 2017
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28: C 72/8/NORTHE./
Item Number:0080-G (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000906173
 
July 2, 2018
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

RICHARD TICKTIN,

Appellant,

v.

GUARDIANSHIP OF STEVEN HOWARD TICKTIN,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-1129

[November 30, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Charles M. Greene, Judge; L.T. Case No. 20-3090 MHC.

Peter Ticktin and Michael J. McCormick, Jr. of The Ticktin Law Group, 

Deerfield Beach, for appellant.

Alexandra V. Rieman of GAPS Legal, PLLC, Sunrise, for appellee Steven 

Howard Ticktin. 

Barry S. Franklin of Barry S. Franklin & Associates, P.A., Aventura, for 

appellee Kim Goldmintz, a/k/a Kim Hope Goldmintz.

PER CURIAM.

Richard Ticktin appeals the summary judgment which denied Ticktin’s 

motion to discharge his former wife as guardian advocate for their adult 

son. We affirm. As acknowledged by the appellees during oral argument, 

our ruling does not preclude the lower court from considering Ticktin’s 

motion for interim judicial review, where he raised issues related to 

timesharing with his son. 

Ticktin also appeals the lower court’s ruling on the appellees’ 

entitlement to attorney’s fees. We dismiss that portion of the appeal. See 

Schmidt v. Schmidt, 319 So. 3d 65, 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (“An order 

merely finding entitlement to attorney’s fees is a non-final, non-appealable 

order.”).

Affirmed in part, dismissed in part.
2

CIKLIN, LEVINE and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Project No. 349-115—Alabama] 

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed an application for non-project use of project lands and waters at the Martin Dam Project (FERC No. 349), and has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the proposal. The project is located on Lake Martin near Dadeville, in Tallapoosa County, Alabama. 

In the application, Alabama Power (licensee) requests Commission authorization to permit The Pointe at Sunset Pointe, LLC (The Pointe) to install 30 boat slips as well as a pier/platform and floating-dock structure on Lake Martin, the project reservoir. These structures would serve the residents of condominiums that are located on adjoining project lands. The EA contains Commission staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the proposal and concludes that approval of the proposal, as modified by the staff-identified alternative, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. 

                    The EA is attached to a Commission order titled “Order Modifying and Approving Non-Project Use of Project Lands and Waters,” which was issued February 22, 2007, and is available for review and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at                     *http://www.ferc.gov*                     using the “elibrary” link. Enter the project number (prefaced by P- and excluding the last three digits) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov*                     or toll-free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.                 

Philis J. Posey, 

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. E7-4718 Filed 3-14-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in (i) Registration Statements on Form S-16, File Nos. 2-51894,
2-55664, 2-63470 and 2-75654; (ii) Registration Statements on Form S-8, File
Nos. 2-77752, 33-10747, 33-24934, 33-33018, 33-54403, 33-54443, 33-54555,
333-08059, 333-08087, 333-60839, 333-42178 and 333-53908; and (iii) Registration
Statements on Form S-3, File Nos. 2-84910, 33-26314, 33-23880, 33-42698,
33-44871, 33-45091, 33-46999, 33-54317, 33-69432, 333-04385, 333-40869,
333-44421, 333-55921, 333-68257, 333-91257, 333-54896 and 333-55866 of our
report dated February 2, 1999 (except with respect to the matters discussed in
Note 6 to the December 31, 2000 consolidated financial statements, as to which
the dates are March 16, 2000 and February 14, 2001), on the consolidated
financial statements of Kinder Morgan, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended
December 31, 1998 included in this Amendment No. 2 on Form 10-K/A.



                                                        /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

Denver, Colorado

May 2, 2001
**Exhibit 32.1****Certification of Periodic Financial Reports**     I, Paul A. Lang, President of Arch Western Resources, LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:     (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006 (the“Periodic Report”) which this statement accompanies fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and     (2) information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of Arch Western Resources, LLC.                                                          /s/ Paul A. Lang   Paul A. Lang   President   Date: August 11, 2006
a51062790ex10_1.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 


EXHIBIT A







PERFORMANCE-BASED VESTING







Subject to Sections 4 and 5 of this Grant Agreement, the RSUs shall vest and become nonforfeitable in the Applicable Percentage of the Maximum Number of RSUs. The Applicable Percentage shall range from 0-100% and shall be determined based on the Company's actual Three-Year Aggregate EPS for the Performance Period, plus the Company's Percentile ROAA Ranking for the Performance Period, with the portion of the Applicable Percentage related to each performance measure as set forth in the charts below:


 




	 	
Percentile ROAA Ranking

	
Applicable Percentage


	 	
Maximum: 90th or higher

	
50%


	 	
Target: 75th – 89th

	
20%


	 	
Minimum: 51st – 74th

	
8%


	 	
50th or below

	
0%


	 	
               Plus

	  
	 	  	  
	 	
Three-Year Aggregate EPS

	
Applicable Percentage


	 	
Maximum: $8.22 or more

	
50%


	 	
Target:  $7.99-$8.21

	
20%


	 	
Minimum:  $7.50-$7.98

	
8%


	 	
Below $7.50

	
0%









 


For example, if at the end of the Performance Period the Committee determined that the Company ranked above the 90th percentile to peers in ROAA, and had Three-Year Aggregate EPS of $9.00, the Applicable Percentage would be 100% and the Maximum Number of RSUs would be converted to and paid in shares of Common Stock.  The performance of the Company during the Performance Period shall be measured against the base EPS for the fiscal year immediately prior to the start of the Performance Period.







Any RSUs that do not vest based on the performance requirements set forth in this Exhibit A (and which have not previously terminated pursuant to the terms of the Grant Agreement) will automatically terminate as of the last day of the Performance Period.







For purposes of the Award, the following definitions shall apply:








	
  

	
●

	
"EPS" means the diluted earnings per share of the Company as determined for financial reporting purposes consistent with Financial Accounting Standard 128 (now ASC 260), excluding any acquisition costs and restructuring adjustments made to EPS as a result of a business combination that occurs during the Performance Period in accordance with Financial Accounting Standard 141 (revised; now ASC 805).













	
  

	
●

	
"Three-Year Aggregate EPS" means the total of the Company's EPS in each of the years in the Performance Period.













	
  

	
●

	
"Percentile Ranking" means the percentile ranking of the simple average of the Company's Return on Average Assets (ROAA) for the years in the Performance Period, as compared to the simple average ROAA of all public banks with between $1.5 billion and $3 billion in total assets, as measured and published by SNL Financial.













	
  

	
●

	
"Performance Period" means the period commencing on the January 1 immediately prior to the Grant Date and ending three years thereafter.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-41388 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JAVIER NUNEZ-FLORES, also known as Javier Flores-Fernandez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-00-CR-305-1

-------------------- December 12, 2001 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Javier Nunez-Flores appeals the 72-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to a charge of being found in the United States after deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends first that the felony conviction that resulted in his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) was an element of the offense that should have been charged in the indictment. Nunez-Flores acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the issueNo. 00-41388 -2- for Supreme Court review in light of the decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90, 496; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001)
. Nunez-Flores’s argument is foreclosed. Nunez-Flores contends also that his indictment violated the Fifth and Sixth Amendments because it lacked an allegation that he acted with general intent. He acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by this court’s precedent in United States v. Guzman-Ocampo , 236 F.3d 233, 236 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 121 S. Ct. 2600 (2001), and , 250 F.3d 294, 299-300 (5th Cir. 2001), petition for cert. filed , (U.S. Jul. 24, 2001) (No. 01- 5535), but he wishes to preserve the issue for review by the Supreme Court. In Berrios-Centeno , 250 F.3d at 299-300, the court examined language identical to the language in the Nunez-Flores’s indictment and held that it sufficiently alleged a general intent to reenter. Accordingly, Nunez-Flores’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4939 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4939

To provide that weighted sleep products for infants shall be considered 
   banned hazardous products under section 8 of the Consumer Product 
                  Safety Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 1, 2024

Mr. Blumenthal introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that weighted sleep products for infants shall be considered 
   banned hazardous products under section 8 of the Consumer Product 
                  Safety Act, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Safeguarding Infants from Dangerous 
Sleep Act''.

SEC. 2. BANNING OF WEIGHTED SLEEP PRODUCTS FOR INFANTS.

    (a) In General.--A weighted sleep product for infants, regardless 
of the date of manufacture, shall be considered a banned hazardous 
product under section 8 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 
2057).
    (b) Weighted Sleep Product for Infants Defined.--In this section, 
the term ``weighted sleep product for infants'' means a wearable 
blanket, sleep sack, swaddle, or similar product that is sold, offered 
for sale, manufactured for sale, distributed in commerce, or imported 
into the United States--
            (1) to be placed on or worn by an infant up to 1 year old; 
        and
            (2) that includes materials that add weight to the product 
        for a purpose other than for insulation or decoration.
    (c) Regulations.--The Consumer Product Safety Commission may 
promulgate, under section 553 of title 5, United States Code, 
regulations to define, or modify the definitions of, terms used in this 
Act.
    (d) Effective Date.--This Act shall take effect on the date that is 
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
PROMISSORY NOTE


$225.00                                                       June 30, 2004
                                                          Newport Beach, CA


     On Demand FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned promises to pay in
lawful money of the United States of America to the order of Cygni
Capital, LLC, nominee or assignee, the sum of TWO HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE
DOLLARS ($225.00), with interest from June 30, 2004 until paid at the
rate of ten percent (10%) per annum.

     Should interest not be paid, it shall thereafter bear interest as
the principal, but such unpaid interest so compounded shall not exceed
an amount equal to simple interest on the principal at the maximum
rate permitted by law.  The undersigned hereby waives presentment of
payment, protest, notice of protest, notice of nonpayment, and
diligence in bringing suit, and further agrees, in case suit is
instituted, to collect this Promissory Note or any portion thereof, to
pay such additional sum for attorneys' fees as the Court may adjudge
reasonable in such suit.


                                   MEZZANINE INVESTMENT CORPORATION

                                   By:  /s/ Eric Chess Bronk
                                        Eric Chess Bronk, President
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0527

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MARCIAL MEJIA JR.,

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 June 22, 2020, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 15 2020

05/15/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0527
Exhibit 32

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 Fruit Of The Loom Unsecured Creditors Trust (the
UCT) on Form 10-Q for the period ended January 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, W. Edward Clingman, Jr., a principal of Clingman & Hanger
Management Associates, LLC, Trust Administrator of the UCT, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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



|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                                                                        |  |                        
|------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: March 8, 2006 |  |  |  | By: |  | Clingman & Hanger Management Associates, LLC as Trust Administrator of the Fruit Of The Loom Unsecured Creditors Trust
|                    |  |  | 
|                    |  |  |  |     |  | /s/ W. Edward Clingman, Jr.                                                                                           
|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                                                                        |  | W. Edward Clingman, Jr.
|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                                                                        |  | Principal
2013-12-20 11:54 FAA 8172225092 » 2024935142 p 1

To: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Company: Federal Aviation Administration Ti3lllphane: Fax; 2:02.493.5142

Fr{.mt: Annjanat Chennauft, Till«: Agency Attorney

Withdrawal of Complaint 

## Federal 

## Aviation Administration
Southwot Region CJffle& o:f**R~Uitmlll** Counsel FculWorth, Texas 7i}1S7 pgrck!ll!!.li!!Coyr!q,rArWrptHi 2601 Maat:IJl>M Boulevard f£lltWotih, Tuxas 76137

In the Matter of: Mesa A!rllnes, Inc.- FAA lJock.et. No&, 2013-0721, 2013-0722, 2013-0846, and 20"13-0047.

Plew§e Note: 'This masmage !11 Intended anlyfOJ' the use ofthe i.ndlvh:lual orent!ly to which it i& addressed and may contain information !hal is privileged, confidential. and exempt from dlscro.sure undar applicable law,''2013-12-20 11:56

In the Matter of; FAA 8172225092 » 2024935142 p 4/9

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS



## •

'it: WASHINGTON, D.C

.
FAA Docllat No, 20'13{1722 FAA Case No. 20:11SW07003S 

### AL,J**~** 

### NatYet Assigned
WITHDRAWAl OF COMPLAINT Ttm Federal 

### Avlatk.Jn AdmlnlstraUon (FAA}, in accordanca with Sec!lon 

### Kt215 of the Rules of Praclice In FAA Civil Penally Actions, herebywithdraws tt.s complaint**T~1is** complaint 

### is withdrawn because the 

### pat1!os 

### haw reached aaetllament of the case and a 

### hearing is no longer required. Dated this 

### 20illday ofOar:embar**201~t**

ERIC 

### E. ANDERSON 

### Regional**Co~nsel**

### Soulhwes~~~ion 

# 0 By: .·

# ~- )
.

# fA-.~c:~ ............. · nnjenet Chennault 

### l{.tomey (8'17} :222-50712013-12-20 11:57 FAA 8172225092 » 2024935142 p 5/9

CERTIFiCATE OFSERVICE 

### I hereby 

### cartlfy that the original and one 

### ropy of the foregoing Withdrawal of Complaint has bean maitoo December 20, 2013, by ('.ertifiad Mail- Re!um Receipt Requested and fax to: Hearing Docket Federal Aviation Adtninlstratlon 800 lndepandenooAvanua, S.W•. Wallhfngton, D.C. 20591 

### Attn; 

### Ha<J.rlng Docket 

### Cltrk, AGC430 Wilbur Wright**8ui!dfng--8u~a** 2W1000 

### I hereby certify that a copy of the**foregC~ing** 

### Withdrawal of Complaint has been mailed December20, 20"13, by

### C.erttfted Mail-Return Receipt Requested, to the fotrow!ng: Brian G!liman, Vice-Presidentand Genera! Counsel Mesa Alr Gmup 410 North 44th Street, Suite 700 Phoenix, 

### Al 85008**Chrl!stoph~r** Pappaioanou 

### Director, Legal Affairs MesaAir Group 

### 410 North 44th Street, 

### Suite 700 Phoenix,

### AZ 85008
No. 64166.

protest 59/25532 (New York).

#### Overton & Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with rule 5(b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.