alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 48886]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24596]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

    Under C.F.R. Sec. 50.7, notice is hereby given that on August 29, 
1997, a proposed Consent Decree in United States v. Waste Management of 
Kentucky, Inc., et al., Civil Action No: 90-0632-L(J), was lodged with 
the United States Court for the Western District of Kentucky. This 
Consent Decree will resolve our claims under Section 107 of the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 
(CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. Sec. 9607, for response costs incurred and to be 
incurred by the United States at the Tri-City Industrial Disposal Site 
in Brooks, Bullitt County, Kentucky (Site).
    The Consent Decree requires defendants Waste Management of 
Kentucky, LLC (successor to Waste Management of Kentucky, Inc.), Ford 
Motor Company, and the Dow Corning Corporation (Settling Defendants) to 
pay the United States $2,059,000 for past response costs incurred for 
the Site. The Settling Defendants are currently complying with a CERCLA 
Section 106 Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) addressing the 
Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) for the Site.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the consent 
decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General 
of the Environment and Natural Resources Division, Department of 
Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530, and should refer to United States v. 
Waste Management of Kentucky, Inc., et al., D.J. Ref. No. 90-11-2-515.
    The Consent Decree may be examined at the Office of the United 
States Attorney, 510 West Broadway, Louisville, Kentucky; at U.S. EPA 
Region 4, 61 Forsythe Street, SE, Atlanta, Georgia; and at the Consent 
Decree Library, 1120 G Street, N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C., (202) 
624-0892. A copy of the Consent Decree may be obtained in person or by 
mail from the Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street, N.W., 4th Floor, 
Washington, D.C. 20005. When requesting a copy, please enclose a check 
in the amount of $5.50 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to 
the Consent Decree Library.
Walker B. Smith,
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural 
Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 97-24596 Filed 9-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
<PAGE>
[WCI STEEL LOGO]

                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.2.15


                                                              January 10, 2001



Ira Leon Rennert
The Renco Group, Inc.
30 Rockefeller Plaza - 42nd Floor
New York, NY 10112

Dear Ira:

     This letter will confirm our conversation on November 15, 2000 regarding
the Net Worth Appreciation Participation Agreements between yourself and each of
the executive officers of WCI and the Net Worth Appreciation Plan for Key
Managers. Due to the extraordinary market conditions, cumulative net income as
described in paragraph 2 in the individual Net Worth Agreements and in the Net
Worth Appreciation Plan will be suspended for the period August 1, 2000 through
October 31, 2001. As such, each individual's net worth account will not reflect
the results of WCI during the above-mentioned period. For our records, please
sign below indicating your agreement with the above.

                                               Sincerely,

                                      /S/      EDWARD R. CAINE
                                      ------------------------

                                               Edward R. Caine
                                               President & CEO

ERC/dj

011001ir.erc

/S/      IRA LEON RENNERT
-------------------------

         Ira Leon Rennert
#### SOUTHLAND CONTAINER CORPORATION, a corporation, Appellant, v. A. Grady RENEGAR and Jack Fugate, partners, d/b/a Professional Electric Company, a partnership, Appellees.

No. K-437.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Aug. 7, 1969.

Dawson, Galant, Maddox, Boyer, Sulik & Nichols, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Marks, Gray, Yates, Conroy & Gibbs, Jacksonvil'e, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This cause having been orally argued before the court, the briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full *442consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINGTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
#### HEALTH CENTERS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Appellant, v. HIALEAH CONVALESCENT HOME, INC., a Florida corporation, et al., Appellees.

No. 69-1072.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 17, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 22 (Monday, February 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 5008]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2526]


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


FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Notice of Proposals to Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or to Acquire Companies that are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation      Y, (12 CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire 
or control voting securities or assets of a company that engages either 
directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking 
activity that is listed in Sec.  225.25 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.25) 
or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to 
banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise 
noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. Once the notice has been accepted for processing, it will 
also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of 
Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the 
question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 
of the BHC Act, including whether consummation of the proposal can 
``reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public, such as 
greater convenience, increased competition, or gains in efficiency, 
that outweigh possible adverse effects, such as undue concentration of 
resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interests, or 
unsound banking practices'' (12 U.S.C. 1843). Any request for a hearing 
on this question must be accompanied by a statement of the reasons a 
written presentation would not suffice in lieu of a hearing, 
identifying specifically any questions of fact that are in dispute, 
summarizing the evidence that would be presented at a hearing, and 
indicating how the party commenting would be aggrieved by approval of 
the proposal.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than February 18, 1997.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (R. Chris Moore, Senior Vice 
President) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-2566:
    1. Banc One Corporation, Columbus, Ohio; to acquire Banc One 
Capital Corporation, Columbus, Ohio, and thereby engage in underwriting 
and dealing to a limited extent in all types of debt and equity 
securities. See J.P. Morgan & Co., Inc., The Chase Manhattan Corp., 
Bankers Trust New York Corp., Citicorp and Security Pacific Corp., 75 
Fed. Res. Bull. 192 (1989).

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 28, 
1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-2526 Filed 1-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
#### Larry J. DENNIS, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, Respondent.

No. 70-846.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 21, 1971.

*89Rowan J. Helferty, Jr., Dunedin, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Warren H. Petersen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for respondent.

PIERCE, Chief Judge.

On January 22, 1971, this Court issued opinion in this cause, 243 So.2d 181, reciting that a previous notice of appeal dated June 4, 1969, filed on behalf of petitioner Larry J. Dennis seeking to review a judgment and sentence of the Pinellas County Circuit Court entered on May 8, 1969, had been dismissed by this Court on February 13, 1970 because the notice of appeal, although dated within time, was filed more than thirty days after said judgment was entered. The opinion also recited that Dennis had filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus setting up that, within the time for filing said notice of appeal, he had signed the same and, being then and there in custody serving his sentence imposed on May 8, 1969, he had left the notice of appeal with an employee of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, a State agency, with the understanding that said employee would mail it for filing within the period allowed by law; that said employee failed to mail said notice within the proper time; and that such employee held such position with the State as to cause his negligence to be classified as State action. Said opinion thereupon directed the issuance of rule to show cause in habeas corpus. Said rule was issued and respondent director in due course made response thereto. The foregoing facts appeared from averments of the petition and response.

The cause was thereupon referred to Honorable Charles M. Phillips of the Pin-ellas County Circuit Court with authority to take testimony as Commissioner for this Court, bearing upon two questions, viz: (1) whether the failure to file the notice of appeal within proper time was attributable to negligence on the part of petitioner Dennis, and (2) whether the employee, previously entrusted with the mailing of said notice to this Court for due filing, was in fact such an employee whose negligence would be considered as State action.

The Commissioner aforesaid proceeded with due dispatch, having difficulty in ascertaining the whereabouts of certain of the witnesses. However, hearing was ultimately held, at which time petitioner Dennis affirmatively advised the Commissioner that it was his desire “not to prosecute the instant Petition”, which representation by petitioner the Commissioner found to be knowingly and intelligently made. The Commissioner thereupon recommended that the instant petition be dismissed and the writ discharged.

This Court has reviewed the entire file in this matter and concludes that the findings of the Commissioner should be approved and his recommendation followed.

The Rule Nisi is thereupon dissolved and the writ of habeas corpus discharged.

LILES and MANN, JJ., concur.
### The surface water supply of California, 1906, with a section on ground-water levels in southern California (Great Basin and Pacific Ocean drainages in California and lower Colorado River drainage)

By: William Billings Clapp

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp213

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
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 Quarterly Report of Pacific Magtron  International  Corp.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending  September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Theodore S. Li, Chief Executive  Officer and 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 to the best of my knowledge:

     (1)  The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
     (2)  The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.

/s/ Theodore S. Li

Theodore S. Li
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2002

This  certification  accompanies  this  report  pursuant  to Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and  shall not be deemed  filed by the  Company  for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Page 1 of 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

KELLY R.,1

 Plaintiff 

 

 v. 

 

FRANK BISIGNANO,2

 

 Defendant 

) CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:23-CV-00685 

) 

) 

) 

) (ARBUCKLE, M.J.) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER 

 In accordance with the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is 

ORDERED that: 

(1) The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. 

(2) The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. 

Date: January 21, 2025 BY THE COURT 

 s/William I. Arbuckle 

 William I. Arbuckle 

 U.S. Magistrate Judge 

1

 We adopt the recommendation of the Committee on Court Administration 

and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States that federal 

courts refer to social security plaintiffs by their first name and last initial. 

2

 Frank Bisignano became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on 

January 20, 2025. He is automatically substituted as the defendant, and no further 

action need be taken to continue this lawsuit. Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d); 42 U.S.C. § 

405(g). 

Case 4:23-cv-00685-WIA Document 17 Filed 01/21/25 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 162 (Thursday, August 21, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44491]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22080]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice 97-115]


NASA Advisory Council (NAC), Task Force on International Space 
Station Operational Readiness, Task Force on Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and 
Docking Missions; Meeting

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 
92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
announces a meeting of the NAC Task Force on International Space 
Station Operational Readiness and Task Force on Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous 
and Docking Missions.

DATES: September 24, 1997, 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Room 7W31, 
300 E Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20546-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Dennis McSweeney, Code IH, 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546-
0001, 202/358-4556.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This meeting will be open to the public up 
to the seating capacity of the room. The agenda for the meeting is as 
follows:

--Review the readiness of the STS-86 Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking 
Mission;
--Review of Task Force Fact-Finding meeting held in Denver, Colorado, 
July 23-24, 1997;
--Review of Task Force Fact-Finding meeting held in Houston, Texas, 
August 25, 1997;
--Review of joint meeting with Russia's Advisory Expert Council, 
September 15-19, 1997, Moscow, Russia.

    It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to 
accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants. Visitors 
will be requested to sign a visitors register.

    Dated: August 14, 1997.
Leslie M. Nolan,
Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-22080 Filed 8-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-M
#### John JACOB, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-2159.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 6, 1977.

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

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Arthur Joel Berger & Jose R. Rodriguez, Asst. At-tys. Gen., for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See *Russ v. State,*313 So.2d 758 (Fla.1975).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ERIC HOUSTON, #10894-074,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:15cv11-RH/CAS

SCOTT NAAS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, sought to initiate a civil rights action in this Court on

January 16, 2015. Plaintiff submitted a § 1983 complaint, doc. 1, and an in forma

pauperis motion, doc. 2. However, Plaintiff is a federal prisoner who is incarcerated in

Lewisburg, Pennsylvania as are all named Defendants in this case. Doc. 1 at 2. 

Although Plaintiff's complaint is nearly illegible, it must be presumed that the event or

issue Plaintiff intends to litigate took place in Pennsylvania. This Court does not have

jurisdiction over parties in Pennsylvania. The appropriate forum for this action pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 118(b) is in the United States District Court for

the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Lewisburg Division. 

Case 4:15-cv-00392-MWB-JVW Document 4 Filed 01/22/15 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

A federal district court has the authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) to transfer a

case to another district or division "in which it could have been brought." The Court may

also raise the issue of defective venue sua sponte. Lipofsky v. New York State Workers

Comp. Bd., 861 F.2d 1257, 1259 (11th Cir. 1988) (stating "a district court may raise on

its own motion an issue of defective venue or lack of personal jurisdiction; but the court

may not dismiss without first giving the parties an opportunity to present their views on

the issue.") 

In light of the foregoing, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404(a) and 1406(a), the

undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS transfer of this action to the United States

District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Lewisburg Division, for all further

proceedings, including review of the in forma pauperis motion, doc. 2.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on January 22, 2015.

 S/ Charles A. Stampelos 

CHARLES A. STAMPELOS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days

after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the

scope of review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No. 4:15cv11-RH/CAS

Case 4:15-cv-00392-MWB-JVW Document 4 Filed 01/22/15 Page 2 of 2
#### Halcyon H. CARROLL, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, DIVISION OF PROFESSIONS, DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION, BOARD OF EXAMINERS OF PSYCHOLOGY, Respondent.

No. FF-33.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 1, 1978.

Fred W. Baggett of Roberts, Miller, Bag-gett & LaFace, Tallahassee, for petitioner.

Connie Hartley, Jacksonville, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner brings for review the final agency action of the Board of Examiners of Psychology in declining to permit her to take the Florida examination pursuant to the provisions of Section 490.19, Florida Statutes.

*496The hearing officer heard and considered conflicting evidence concerning the question of whether the university from which the petitioner had received a doctoral degree in pupil placement services maintained in such doctoral program a standard of training comparable to those universities having programs approved by the American Psychological Association for the granting of a doctoral degree in psychology.

The hearing officer concluded that such a training was not the equivalent of that required by Section 490.19, and, therefore, upheld the order of the Board of Examiners of Psychology. The Board of Examiners of Psychology considered and approved the report of the hearing officer.

This matter is before this court upon conflicting testimony. It is not for this court to substitute its judgment for that of the hearing officer or the Board of Examiners of Psychology. Therefore, the order entered by the Board of Examiners of Psychology denying to Halcyon H. Carroll the right to take such examination is hereby

AFFIRMED.

SMITH, Acting C. J., and ERVIN and MELVIN, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                 ------------

                         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 of Thomasville Bancshares, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, Stephen H. Cheney, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the best of my knowledge:

      1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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/ Stephen H. Cheney
     ---------------------------------------
     Stephen H. Cheney
     President and Chief Executive Officer
     March 31, 2006
     (principal executive, financial and accounting officer)
No.---.

#### Fuentes *v.*Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board of California et al.

Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Motion to dispense with printing petition denied. *Snider*v. *All State Administrators, Inc.,*414 U. S. 685 (1974).