alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43523-43524]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21569]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP97-685-000]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

August 8, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 6, 1997, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern), 1111 South 103rd Street, Omaha Nebraska 68124-1000, filed 
in Docket No. CP97-685-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205, 
157.212 and 157.216 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural 
Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, 157.212 and 157.216) for authorization to 
upgrade the Rippey #2, an existing delivery point located in Greene 
County, Iowa, to accommodate increased interruptible natural gas 
deliveries to UtiliCorp United, Inc. (UCU) for redelivery to the Rippey 
Co-Op, under Northern's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-
401-000 pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully 
set forth in the request that is on file with the Commission and open 
to public inspection.
    Northern states that it requests authorization to upgrade the 
existing delivery point to accommodate increased natural gas deliveries 
to UCU under Northern's currently effective throughput service 
agreement(s). Northern states that UCU has requested increased 
interruptible service to accommodate area growth.
    Northern states that the proposed increase in volumes to be 
delivered to UCU at the Rippey #2 are 910 MMBtu on a peak day and 
48,500 MMBtu on an annual basis. Northern estimates a cost of $56,000 
for upgrading and UCU will reimburse Northern.
    Northern states that the upgrading is not prohibited by its 
existing tariff and that is has sufficient capacity to accomplish 
deliveries without detriment or disadvantage to other customers. The 
proposed delivery point will not have an effect on Northern's peak day 
and annual deliveries and the total volumes delivered will not exceed 
total volumes authorized prior to this request.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Sec. 157.205 of the 
Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a

[[Page 43524]]

protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed 
therefor, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized 
effective the day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a 
protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time 
allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as 
an application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural 
Gas Act.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21569 Filed 8-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Michael Lee JAKOB.

No. 60297.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 27, 1977.

G. Emitte Core, Jr., Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ossie B. Brown, Dist. Atty., Lennie F. Perez, Marilyn C. Castle, Asst. Dist. Attys., for plaintiff-ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 161 (Wednesday, August 20, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44284]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22024]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


Notice of Filing of Annual Report of Federal Advisory Committee

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to section 13 of Public Law 
92-463, the Annual Report for the following Health Resources and 
Services Administration's Federal Advisory Committees have been filed 
with the Library of Congress:

Health Professions and Nurse Education Special Emphasis Panel

    The FY 1996 Report does not encompass all of the Title VII or any 
of the Title VIII programs of the Public Health Service Act. These 
programs will be incorporated in the FY 1997 Report.
    Copies are available to the public for inspection at the Library of 
Congress Newspaper and Current Periodical Reading Room, Room 1026, 
Thomas Jefferson Building, Second Street and Independence Avenue, SE., 
Washington, D.C. Copies may be obtained from: Ms. Sherry Whipple, 
Program Analyst, Peer Review Branch, Bureau of Health Professions, Room 
8C-23, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857, 
Telephone (301) 443-5926.

    Dated: August 14, 1997.
Jane Harrison,
Advisory Committee Management Office, HRSA.
[FR Doc. 97-22024 Filed 8-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-15-P
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Atlas America Public #9 Ltd. (the
Partnership) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Nancy J. McGurk, Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership, 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 Company.

| | By: | /s/Nancy J. McGurk
| | --- | ------------------

| | Name: | Nancy J. McGurk
| | ----- | ---------------

| | Title: | Chief Financial
                Officer of the Managing General Partner
| | ------ | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Date: | August 16,2004
| | ----- | --------------
No. 99-7981.

#### Carter *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
Exhibit
      10.17

    


    2007
      Management Incentive Plan (“2007 MIP”):

    


    The
      2007
      MIP is a cash incentive plan which links awards to performance results and
      is
      designed to provide cash incentive awards (“Awards”) to five senior management
      employees (the “Participants”): W. Barry Gilbert, Jeffrey Schlarbaum, Brian
      Davis, Donald Doody, and Tina DeVey.

    


    No
      Award
      will be paid to any Participant unless the Company has achieved a minimum net
      income of $400,000 (before taxes and net of all incentives) (“Minimum Net
      Income”).

    


    If
      the
      Minimum Net Income has been achieved, then each Participant will be eligible
      to
      receive an Award, if any, determined on the basis of the degree of achievement
      of certain performance criteria (“Performance Goals”) applicable to that
      Participant.

    


    Performance
      Goals based upon the following measurements have been established: On Time
      Delivery, Net Income Before Taxes, Sales, and Cash Collection Cycle. From the
      foregoing and based upon a Participant’s job responsibilities, the Committee has
      assigned a weighting factor to each Performance Goal as it applies to a
      particular Participant. The formula or matrix prescribing the extent to which
      such Participant’s Award will be earned based upon the level of achievement and
      the weighting of each Performance Goal is set forth on Attachment
      A.

    


    If
      the
      targets for each of a Participant’s Performance Goals are achieved, an Award
      equal to a percentage (varying from 25% to 50% of the Participant’s base salary
      will be paid (the “Target Award”). The incentive percentage of a Participant is
      based upon position in the Company. Below a threshold level of performance
      (“Plan Entry”), no Awards will be made. If the targets are surpassed, Awards
      will increase depending on the percentage of the targets achieved. However,
      no
      Award to a Participant may exceed 200% of the Target Award.

    


    With
      respect to each Participant, no Award will be payable except upon written
      certification by the Committee that the Minimum Net Income has been achieved
      and
      that the Performance Goals applicable to an individual Participant have been
      satisfied to a particular extent.

    


    Payment
      of any Award to a Participant based upon the degree of attainment of the
      applicable Performance Goals will be made within fifteen (15) days after receipt
      by the Company of the audited financial statements for Fiscal 2007. In order
      to
      receive an Award, a Participant must be an employee of the Company on the date
      such Award is to be distributed.

    


    The
      2007
      MIP is based upon the organic growth of the Company. If any acquisition is
      made
      by the Company in Fiscal 2007, the Committee will review the impact of such
      acquisition and determine what, if any, changes should be made to the 2007
      MIP.



    


    
      
        
        

      

      
        1
No. 00-6603.

#### Nubine *v.*Martin.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7849

LLOYD EANES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

WILLIAM C. DUNCIL, Warden, Huttonsville

Correctional Center; KEITH WEESE, Lieutenant

Colonel; HERMAN COX, Major; WILLIAM ISLEI; ROY

WHITE, Administrator of the Hospital; ERNEST

HART, Doctor at Huttonsville Correctional Center; RANDOLPH COUNTY AMBULANCE SERVICE, Driver

and everyone inside the ambulance, et al,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior

District Judge. (CA-94-89-2)

Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: February 8, 1996

Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lloyd Eanes, Appellant Pro Se. Leslie K. Kiser, OFFICE OF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia; John

Everett Busch, Bridgette Rhoden Wilson, BUSCH & TALBOTT, Elkins,

West Virginia, for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Eanes v. Duncil, No. CA-94-89-2 (N.D.W. Va. Sept. 11, 1995).

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
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 125 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 125

 To designate the United States courthouse located at 501 I Street in 
    Sacramento, California, as the ``Robert T. Matsui United States 
                             Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 24, 2005

Mrs. Boxer (for herself, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Durbin) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                      Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the United States courthouse located at 501 I Street in 
    Sacramento, California, as the ``Robert T. Matsui United States 
                             Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States courthouse located at 501 I Street in Sacramento, 
California, shall be known and designated as the ``Robert T. Matsui 
United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the United States courthouse referred to 
in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Robert T. 
Matsui United States Courthouse''.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Gerald HATCHER.

No. 60274.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 15, 1977.

In re: Gerald Hatcher applying for supervisory writs.

Writ refused. On the showing made, there is no basis for the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction at this time. Questions of bail are not res judicata and remain *1172open. Relator’s right to file a new application with the trial court is not precluded.
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 Big Sky Industries IV, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ramon Chimelis, Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 Company.



Dated: February 4, 2009



/s/ Ramon Chimelis

Ramon Chimelis, Treasurer

Big Sky Industries IV, Inc.
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 Annual Report of Franklin Wireless Corp. (the "Company")  on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30,  2009,  as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, OC Kim Chief
Executive  Officer,  and Acting Chief Financial Officer of
the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss.  1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




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




(b) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.









Date:
October 13, 2009




/s/ OC Kim


President
and Acting Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                           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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hartmarx Corporation, (the
"Company") for the period ended November 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Homi B. Patel, as
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
(S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of his 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.


/s/ Homi B. Patel
--------------------
Name:  Homi B. Patel
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date:  March 14, 2003

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to (S) 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
(S) 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

RANDY L. ROUNDTREE, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-2572

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed February 7, 2018.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pasco 

County; Susan G. Barthle, Judge. 

Randy L. Roundtree, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LaROSE, C.J., and KHOUZAM and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1402 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1402

 To amend section 42 of title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the 
          importation and shipment of certain species of carp.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 14, 2005

 Mr. DeWine (for himself, Mr. Levin, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. 
    Bayh, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Feingold, and Mr. Durbin) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                      Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend section 42 of title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the 
          importation and shipment of certain species of carp.

    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 ``Asian Carp Prevention and Control 
Act''.

SEC. 2. ADDITION OF SPECIES OF CARP TO THE LIST OF INJURIOUS SPECIES 
              THAT ARE PROHIBITED FROM BEING IMPORTED OR SHIPPED.

    Section 42(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting after ``Dreissena polymorpha;'' the following: ``of the black 
carp of the species Mylopharyngodon piceus; of the bighead carp of the 
species Hypophthalmichthys nobilis; of the silver carp of the species 
Hypophthalmichthys molitrix; of the largescale silver carp of the 
species Hypophthalmichthys harmandi;''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Kenneth Wayne PATTERSON v. Erla PATTERSON (Lunn).

Civ. 999.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

May 4, 1977.

*1365Tom Radney, Alexander City, for appellant.

Ruth S. Sullivan, Dadeville, for appellee.

WRIGHT, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from judgment denying modification of child custody. We affirm.

The parties were divorced in 1973. By agreement, custody of two minor children was granted to the mother. Each party has remarried. The father began this action by petition for custody of his son Dale, age 12.

The evidence was heard orally before the judge. He determined that the evidence failed to show any material change of circumstances occurring since the divorce which affects the welfare and best interest of the child. We agree. Basically, the evidence of the father was that the boy now wished to live with him. The boy did indicate that he desired to live with his father. However, only a few days before, he had stated to another judge that he desired to continue living with his mother. A few days prior to that statement, he had indicated a desire to live with his father. In less than a month, the child had made three contrary statements. This indicates only a childish uncertainty probably caused by parental pressure and influence. The testimony indicated that he had become physically ill as a result of the pressure.

There was no testimony that the custody of his mother was in any manner detrimental to the welfare and best interest of the child nor that his welfare would be better served by altering custody. Such being the case, there is no authority for change. *In re Ford v. Ford,*293 Ala. 743, 310 So.2d 234 (1975).

It is proper that the court give due consideration to the wishes of a child in determining custody. However, the wishes of the child are not controlling. *Sutton v. Sutton,*55 Ala.App. 254, 314 So.2d 707 (1975). After consideration of all the testimony, we are not impressed that the trial court erred in denying the petition of the father. *Snead*v. *Snead,*279 Ala. 344, 185 So.2d 135 (1966).

AFFIRMED.

BRADLEY and HOLMES, JJ., concur.
#### MIAMI BEACH FIRST NATIONAL BANK, Petitioner, v. William MARKHAM, etc., et al., Respondents.

No. 50941.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 23, 1978.

Rehearing Denied April 28, 1978.

Mallory H. Horton of Horton, Perse & Ginsberg, Miami, for petitioner.

Gaylord A. Wood, Jr., Fort Lauderdale, and Betty Lynn Lee, Gen. Counsel, Harry A. Stewart and J. Bart Budetti, Asst. Gen. Counsels, for Broward County, Fort Laud-erdale, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ. Upon further consideration of the cause, we conclude that no direct conflict of decisions exists as required by Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. Therefore, the writ must be and is hereby discharged.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, HATCHETT and KARL, JJ., concur.
#### Edward LILLIS, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 50186.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 30, 1977.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Thomas G. Murray, Asst. Public Defender, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen, and Sidney M. Pertnoy and Anthony C. Musto, Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ. Upon further consideration of the cause, we conclude that no direct conflict of decisions exists as required by Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. Therefore, the writ must be and is hereby discharged.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON; C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and KARL, JJ., concur.
No. 00-6881.

#### Jones *v.*Powell et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.2

Beacon Enterprise
Solutions Group, Inc.

CERTIFICATION OF
PERIODIC REPORT  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 
18 U.S.C. Section 1350

| | The
undersigned executive officer of Beacon Enterprise Solutions Group, Inc.  (the Company)  certifies
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | the quarterly
 report on Form 10-QSB of the  Company  for the  quarter  ended December 31, 2007,  fully
 complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934; and
|- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | the information
 contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
|- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |                         | /s/ Robert R. Mohr         
| | ----------------------- | ---------------------------
| | Date: February 19, 2008 | Robert R. Mohr             
| |                         | Principal Financial Officer

| | 45 | 
| | -- | 

---