alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 162 (Thursday, August 21, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44473-44474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22171]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Freight Forwarder License Applicants

    Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed 
with the Federal Maritime Commission applications for licenses as ocean 
freight forwarders pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 
(46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR part 510).
    Persons knowing of any reason why any of the following applicants 
should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of 
Freight Forwarders, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, D C 20573.

Worldwide Freight Services, Inc. d/b/a, Worldwide Freight Systems, 5 
West 36th Street, Suite 304, New York, NY 10018, Office: Capitan 
Mohammed Tahir, President
S.A. Maritime International, Inc., 10333 Northwest Freeway, Suite 317, 
Houston, TX 77092-8217, Officers: Maria L. Flores, President, Ignacio 
Flores, Vice President

[[Page 44474]]

Challenge Warehousing, Inc., 1217 S.W. 1st Avenue, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 
33315, Officer: Julie Elder-O'Driscoll, Vice President
Superior Link International Inc., 20547 E. Walnut Drive, Suite B1-G, 
Walnut, CA 91789, Officer: Lisa Wong, CEO.
Worldserv Transport Corporation, 5855 Naples Plaza, Suite 216, Long 
Beach, CA 90803, Officers: Bernardo F. Lim, President, Amelia G. Lim, 
Secretary
Nashnev International Shipping Inc., d/b/a Pro-Order, 333 Falkenburg 
Road N., Suite A101, Tampa, FL 33619, Officers: Gary John Nash, 
President, Peter L. Nevins, Vice President
Cincus, Inc., 2244 Luna Road, Suite 100, Carrollton, TX 75006, 
Officers: Jerry Ware, President, Ernest Conner, Vice President
Stevens Forwarders, Inc., 155 Diplomat Drive, Suite D, Columbia City, 
IN 46725, Officers: Morrison M. Stevens, President, John H. Stevens, 
Treasurer

    Dated: August 18, 1997.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-22171 Filed 8-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 162 (Thursday, August 21, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44506-44507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22192]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY


Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as Amended by Public Law 104-13; 
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority.

ACTION: Submission for OMB review; comment request.

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

SUMMARY: The proposed information collection described below will be 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, as 
required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, 
as amended). The Tennessee Valley Authority is soliciting public 
comments on this proposed collection as provided by 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1). 
Requests for information, including copies of the information 
collection proposed and supporting documentation, should be directed to 
the Acting Agency Clearance Officer: Wilma H. McCauley, Tennessee 
Valley Authority, 1101 Market Street (WR 4Q), Chattanooga, Tennessee 
37402-2801; (423) 751-2523.
    Comments should be sent to OMB Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for Tennessee Valley Authority no 
later than September 22, 1997.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Type of Request: Regular submission, proposal to extend without 
revision a currently approved collection of information (OMB control 
number 3316-0019).
    Title of Information Collection: Energy Right Residential Program.
    Frequency of Use: On occasion.
    Type of Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Small Business or Organizations Affected: No.
    Federal Budget Functional Category Code: 271.
    Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 12,000.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 3,600.
    Estimated Average Burden Hours Per Response: .3.
    This information is used by distributors of TVA power to assist in 
identifying and financing energy

[[Page 44507]]

improvements for their electrical energy customers.
William S. Moore,
Senior Manager, Administrative Services.
[FR Doc. 97-22192 Filed 8-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120-08-U
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 Thomas Equipment, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Luigi Lo Basso, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 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 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.

Dated:  November 14, 2005                       By:  /s/ LUIGI LO BASSO
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Luigi Lo Basso
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
## SERVED SEPTEMBER25, 2012 . . 

## · · .**,~ /~~~RTMENT**  

## OF



## . . ..:,;>;\N,SPORTATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIQ}'j(\tl 

## 0PERATION0 

### OFFICE OFHEARINGS .. .'J

InThe Matter Of: KALITTA AIR, LLC Respondent 

### WASHINGTON, DC 

### lUll 2b 

### A 

### g: 33. ) ) ') ) ) DocketNo. FAA-2012-0782 Case No. 2011-GL-23-0099


### ORDER DISMISSING PROCEEDING On September 24,2012, the Respondent, Kalitta Air, LLC,fileda one-page letter statingthat it was Withdrawing its Request for Hearing to the Complaint issued bythe Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) onJuly 16,2012. The Respondent's letter of Withdrawal statedthat the partieshadreached a settlement. There is no hearing**cu~ently** setinthis matter. It

### Is Hereby Ordered: · · 1) The Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference, set for October 31, 2012·at 1:30pmEastern time, is cancelled. · 2) Pursuantto 14 C.P.R. §13.215, the Respondent, KalittaAir, LLC, has Withdrawn its Request for Hearing, and this proceeding is dismissed with prejudice.

Attachment: Service ListSERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: . Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WI000 1 George W. Kelsey, Respondent's Counsel Kalitta Air, LLC 2395 S. Huron Parkway, Suite 200 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 TEL: 734-973-1222 FAX: 734-973-1223 Chris G. Zurales, Complainant's Counsel Great Lakes Region, AGL- 7K Federal Aviation Administration . 2300 East Devon A venue Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696 TEL: 847-294-7713 FAX: 847-294-7498

ONE COPY

The**Ho~orable** J.E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge Office of Hearings, M-20

U.S. Department of Transportation 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2132 FAX: 202-366-7536

FDMS No. FAA-2012-0782 (Civil Penalty Action) 1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in**p~rson** or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
#### Margaret E. KITZMILLER, Appellant, v. SOUTHEAST SERVICES, INC., etc., Appellee.

No. 77-2002.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 9, 1978.

*272Alan E. Fallik, Legal Aid Service of Broward County, Inc., Hollywood, for appellant.

Friedman & Britton and J. T. Haley, Miami, for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and PEARSON and KEHOE, JJ.

PEARSON, Judge.

On January 19, 1977, the trial court entered a default final judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant. The judgment did not include an award of attorney’s fees for the plaintiff. The parties, by their respective attorneys, thereafter entered into a stipulation which provided: (1) The final judgment was to be vacated. (2) The defendant admitted an indebtedness “. . . for the principal sum of $2,700.81, plus interest in the sum of $335.25, plus court costs in the amount of $48.00, for a total of $3,084.06.” (3) The defendant agreed to make “monthly payments.” (4) The plaintiff would be permitted to take judgment without notice “. . . in the event of default in any one payment ... for the remaining balance due and owing . . . ” The trial court ratified and executed the stipulation.

The defendant defaulted. and a final judgment, dated June 29, 1977, was entered. The judgment did not include attorney’s fees.

The plaintiff, on July 28,1977, “. . . move[d] to amend the Final Judgment . ” upon the ground that “[t]he original Judgment failed to include attorney’s fees to which the plaintiff is entitled.” On August 18, 1977, the trial judge entered an amended final judgment and included $350.00 as attorney’s fees for the plaintiff.

The motion to amend final judgment was not timely under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.530(g). See *Allen v. Allen,*230 So.2d 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969). The motion was not a proper motion under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540. Cf. *Kuykendall*v. *Kuykendall,*301 So.2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). The inclusion of attorney’s fees contravenes the stipulation of the parties.

The final judgment, dated August 18, 1977, is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions for further proceedings upon the judgment entered June 29, 1977.

Reversed.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

             STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         Year Ended December 31
                                         ----------------------
                                          1996       1995        1994
                                          ----       ----        ----
<S>                                 <C>           <C>          <C>

Weighted Average Common
Stock Outstanding                       4,941,041   4,939,989   5,047,849

Options Outstanding                         6,795

Options Exercised                             670
                                        ---------
                                        4,948,506   4,939,989   5,047,849
                                        =========  ==========   =========

Income (Loss)                             501,504  (2,117,319)  1,336,685
                                        =========  ==========   =========

Income (Loss) Per Share                       .10        (.43)        .26
                                        =========  ==========   =========

</TABLE>
#### Ex parte Barbara G. ALBRIGHT.

77-266.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

March 24, 1978.

*177MADDOX, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and JONES, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.
November 18, 2014 

Kevin Schlemmer 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

US Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

SkyWest Airlines' Essential Air Service Termination Notice for Crescent City, CA 

Dear Mr. Schlemmer: 

;._: 

This letter will serve as SkyWest Airlines termination notice for turboprop air service 

between Crescent City, CA (CEC) and San Francisco, CA (SFO). The last day of service 

will be on April6, 2015. 

SkyWest will transition to an all jet fleet in 2015 and will eliminate the EMB-120 

Brasilia from the Sky West fleet. This turboprop aircraft is currently used in service from 

Crescent City, CA under the Essential Air Service Program. This fleet change is driven 

in part by the additional challenges associated with the new FAR 117 flight and duty 

rules implemented in January 2014. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Sincerely, 

Michael Thompson 

Chief Operating Officer 

SkyWest Airlines
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T MAR T HA AL I C I A C E RNA AR E B AL O, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 70831 A ge nc yN o. A 079- 523- 206 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M ar c h 8, 2011 ** B efo re: F A R R IS , O ’ S C A N N L A IN , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. M arthaA l i c i aC e rnaA r e ba l o, ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons f

or r e v ie w o f

th e B o ar do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ’ ( “B I A ” ) o r d e rd e n y in g h e rm o tio n to r e i s s ue the B I A ’ s pr e vi ous de c i s i on de ny i ng he rm ot i on t o r e ope n. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f orabus e of

di s c r e t i on the de ni a l of 

# FI LED MA R 25 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 70831 2 am o tio n to r e o p e n , an dr e v ie w d e n o v o c la im s o f du e p r o c e s s v io la tio n s . H erna ndez -V

elasqu ezv. H

older , 611 F . 3d 1073, 1077 ( 9th C i r . 2010) . W e de ny th e p e titio n f

o rr e v ie w . T he B I A di d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on orvi ol a t e due pr oc e s s i n de ny i ng C e rna A re bal o’ s m ot i on t o rei ss ue, w here i tconcl ud ed thatthe evi dence s ub m i tt ed w as in s u f f ic ie n t to r e b u t th e p r e s u m p tio n o f p r o p e rm a ilin g . See Si ng h v. G on zales , 4 9 4 F . 3 d1 1 7 0 , 1 1 7 2 -7 3 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 7 ) (B IA i s o b l i g at edt o co n si d er an dad d ress th e e v id e n c e s ub m itte db yp e titio n e r ) ; s e e a l s o La ta v . I

NS , 204 F . 3d 1241, 1246 (9th C i r. 20 00 ) ( re qu i ri ng error f or pet i t i on ert o p re vai l on a due process cl ai m ). P E T I T I O N F O R R E V I E W D E N I E D .
CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of
      Global Wataire,
      Inc. for the quarter ending November 30, 2008, I, Sydney A.
      Harland, Chief
      Executive Officer of Global Wataire, Inc., hereby 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 and belief, that:





1.     Such
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending , 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
      quarter ending , fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of Global Wataire, Inc.





Dated: January
      21, 2008





/s/
      Sydney A.
      Harland


Sydney
      A. Harland, Chief Executive Officer of


Global
      Wataire, Inc.
RCRA Corrosivity Coalition

Meeting with U.S. EPA, Waste Characterization Branch, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

June 17, 2015

Meeting Agenda

RCRA Corrosivity Coalition

and

U.S. EPA Waste Characterization Branch

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

June 17, 2015

11:00 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

I. INTRODUCTIONS

II. ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION

A. Agency Information Needs: What information would be helpful to the Agency in 

formulating its decision on the petition? When would EPA like to receive that 

information?

B. Injury/Adverse Effects Data: Is EPA aware of any information related to injuries 

or other adverse effects from waste materials with pH under 12.5, other than the 

allegations contained in the petition? Any government or academic epidemiology 

studies?

C. Quantity of Materials/Burden Assessment: Has EPA assessed the quantity of 

waste materials that would be brought into the RCRA hazardous waste regulatory 

system if the petitioners request is granted? Any assessment of the economic 

impact and management burdens such a decision would pose?

► Discussion of individual stakeholder concerns and examples

D. State Concerns/Approaches: Have the States expressed concern about the 

Corrosivity Characteristic? Do any states take a different approach in assessing 

corrosivity of waste?

E. Test Method: We understand that a test method for solids was under 

consideration by EPA in the 1990s but never adopted. Why? Is the Agency

aware of another potential test method appropriate for solids?

F. EPA Standard-Setting Authority: How does EPA view its authority to establish a 

threshold for determining what materials qualify as hazardous waste? What 

standard does EPA use to determine if pH 12.5 or pH 11.5 is the appropriate 

threshold?

G. History of Corrosivity Characteristic: What was the basis for EPA’s 1996 

decision as part of the Scoping Study not to amend the RCRA Corrosivity

Characteristic?

H. Schedule: What is the Agency’s schedule for formulating a response to the 

petition by March 2016?
RCRA Corrosivity Coalition

Meeting with U.S. EPA, Waste Characterization Branch, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

June 17, 2015

Stakeholder Attendees

John Wittenborn, Kelley Drye & Warren, coordinator of RCRA Corrosivity Coalition, also 

representing Leather Industries of America

Joe Green, Kelley Drye & Warren, co-coordinator of RCRA Corrosivity Coalition, also 

representing Specialty Steel Industry of North America

Amy Schaffer, American Forest & Paper Association

Brendan Mascarenhas, American Chemistry Council

Tom Herman, Portland Cement Association

Colin Carroll, American Iron and Steel Institute

Tawny Bridgeford, National Mining Association

Jeff Gunnulfsen, American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers

John Arnett, Copper & Brass Fabricators Council

Dan Moss, Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates

Jamie Conrad, for Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates

Ali Alavi, Horsehead Corporation

Eric Stuart, Steel Manufacturers Association

Karen Kiggins, National Slag Association

William Herz, National Lime Association

Kerry Kelly, Waste Management Inc.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-4710

_____________________________

BRIANNA ARMOUR,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Gary L. Bergosh, Judge.

February 22, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Brianna Armour, pro se, Appellant.
2

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
1 John T. Boyd , Chief Justi ce (Ret. ), Seventh Court of Appeals, sit ti ng by assignment. Tex. Gov’t Code An n. §7 5.00 2(a) (1) (V erno n Su pp. 2 003 ). NO. 07-02-0505-CR IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL E MAY 27, 2003

______________________________ W ENDELL L. SIMPSON, Appellant
v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE 364 TH DISTRIC T COURT O F LUBBOCK COUNTY; NO. 2001-438,539; HON. BRADLE Y UNDERWOOD, PRESIDING

_______________________________ Memorandum Opinion

_______________________________ Before QUINN and REAVIS, JJ., an d BOYD, S.J. 1 In thre e issues, appel lant Wendell L. Simpson attempts toappeal from an or de r deferring his adjudic ation and placi ng him on community supervision for seven years. He had pled guilty to the offense of indecency with a c hild, and the trial cour t signed i ts order deferring the adjudicati on of his guil t and placing hi m on community s upervisi on on October 16, 2002. On October 29, 2002, appellant

moved for a new

trial. The motion w as2

overrule d on November 29, 2002. Appellant then filed his no tice of appeal on D ecember 5, 2002. We dismiss for want of jurisdicti on. A notice of appea l must be filed within 30 days after the da y sentence is imposed
or suspended in open court or within 90 days if the d efendant timely fil es a motion for new trial. T EX . R. A PP . P. 26.2(a). In this instance, appe llant did file a motion f or new trial, which would ordi narily make his noticeof appeal timely

. However, a motion for new trial is not avail able as a remedy for a defendant who receivesdeferred adjudic ation. Donovan v. State, 68 S.W.3d 633, 638 ( Tex. Crim. App. 2002); Murray v. State, 89 S.W .3d 187, 188 (Tex. App.--Dallas 200 2, pet. ref’d). That is
so because a new

trial is a rehearing of a criminal a ction after the trial cour t has set aside
a finding or verdict of guilt. T EX . R. A PP . P. 21.1. Furthermore, there is neit her a finding o r verdictof guilty

nor an imposit ion or suspens ion of a sentence w hen the adjudicati on of guiltis deferred. Garcia v. St ate, 29 S.W.3d 899 , 900 (Tex. App .--Houston [ 14 th Dist.] 2000, no pet.); Hamm ack v. State, 963 S.W .2d 199, 200 (Tex. App.--Aust in 1998, no pet.). Thus, to perfect an appea l from an order defe rring his adjudication, an appellant mu st notice his appeal w ithin 30 days after theorder is s igned. Murray v. State , 89 S.W.2d at 188; Garcia v. State, 29 S.W.3d at 901; Hamm ack v. State, 963 S.W.2d at 200. Because appellant

failed to do so here, we haveno jurisdi ction over the appeal. Olivo v. St ate, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) ; R odman v. S tate, 47 S. W .3d 5 45, 5 48 (T ex. App.--Amaril lo 2000, no pet.)

. Accordingl y, we dismiss the app eal for want of jurisdicti on.
Brian Quinn Justice Do not publish

.