alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 197 (Friday, October 10, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 52946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26917]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08-97-040]


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, 
Algiers Alternate Route, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District has issued a 
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the 
Belle Chasse vertical lift span drawbridge on State Route 23 across the 
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Algiers Alternate Route at mile 3.8 at 
Belle Chasse, Louisiana. This deviation allows the bridge to remain 
closed to navigation between the hours of 4 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. on 
Saturday, October 25, 1997 and between the hours of 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. 
on Sunday, October 26, 1997. This closure is necessary to facilitate 
movement of vehicular traffic for the New Orleans Open House 1997 Air 
Show, to be held at the U.S. Naval Air Station at Belle Chasse, 
Louisiana.

DATES: The deviation is effective from 4 p.m. on October 25, 1997 until 
7 p.m. on October 26, 1997.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Belle Chasse bridge has a vertical 
clearance of 40 feet above mean high water in the closed-to-navigation 
position and 100 feet in the open-to-navigation position.
    Navigation on the waterway consists primarily of tugs with tows, 
commercial fishing vessels, sailboats and other recreational craft. 
Between 150,000 and 200,000 members of the public are expected to 
attend the New Orleans Open House Air Show on each day. The Louisiana 
Department of Transportation and Development has requested a temporary 
deviation from the normal operation of the bridge so that the extremely 
heavy volume of vehicular traffic that will be departing the Naval Air 
Station following the event can be expeditiously dispersed.
    This deviation requires that the draw of the Belle Chasse bridge 
remain closed to navigation between the hours of 4 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. 
on Saturday, October 25, 1997 and between the hours of 4 p.m. and 7 
p.m. on Sunday, October 26, 1997. Presently, the draw is required to 
open on signal during weekends.

    Dated: September 18, 1997.
T.W. Josiah,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 97-26917 Filed 10-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M
#### UNITED STATES of America v. Clara May SMITH, Administratrix, et al.

No. 1520.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Jan. 27, 1937.

William C. Lewis, U. S. Atty., of Oklahoma City, Okl.

Benjamin E. Cook, of Ponca City, Old., for appellee.

Before LEWIS and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed on stipulation.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Louise POITEVENT.

No. 62094.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 12, 1978.

In re: Louise Poitevent, applying for writs of review, prohibition and/or mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Writ denied.
##### 



EXHIBIT 13: CERTIFICATION OF THE SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT & GENERAL MANAGER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER 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 Taro Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (the Company) on
Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Samuel Rubinstein, Senior Vice President &
General Manager of the Company, and Kevin Connelly, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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. Date: June 29, 2005
    By:
    /s/ Samuel RubinsteinSamuel RubinsteinSenior Vice President & General Manager By:
    /s/ Kevin ConnellyKevin ConnellySenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### In re Involuntary Dissolution of LOCK-HART REALTY, INC., a Florida corporation.

No. 69-287.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 5, 1969.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Martin County; Wallace Sample, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
Starting October 1, 2013, you can apply and enroll in health coverage through the Health 

Insurance Marketplace at HealthCare.gov. Health coverage starts as early as January 1, 2014, 

and open enrollment ends on March 31, 2014. 

Through the Marketplace, you can apply, compare all your options, and find out if you can get lower 

costs on monthly premiums or get free or low-cost coverage. When you’re ready to enroll, you’ll 

decide how you pay your premiums or get help signing up for Medicaid or CHIP if you’re eligible.

Before open enrollment begins, you can explore your options, prepare to apply, and sign up 

for Marketplace updates.

Explore your options

If you have job-based health insurance you 

like, you can keep it. You may be able to 

change to Marketplace coverage if you want 

to. 

You can ask your employer if it plans to offer 

health insurance. If not, you may need to 

get insurance through the Marketplace or 

from other sources in 2014. If you don’t have 

coverage, you may have to pay a fee.

When you visit HealthCare.gov, you can find 

out if your state runs its own Marketplace. 

If it does, you’ll use its website instead of 

HealthCare.gov to apply, compare your 

options, and enroll in coverage.

If you run a small business, you can go to 

the Small Business Health Options Program 

(SHOP) Marketplace to find out about 

providing coverage for your employees. 

If you have Medicare, you’re already covered 

and don’t need to 

make any changes. 

Get Ready to Enroll in the Marketplace

•	 Visit HealthCare.gov

•	 Subscribe to get updates

and reminders

•	 Plan your budget, learn

about coverage, and

gather your information

•	 Apply by filling out the 

Marketplace application

•	 Compare your coverage

options

•	 Enroll in a plan or program

What you can do 

starting October 1

What you can do now 

to get started
Prepare to apply

The Marketplace offers different types of health plans to meet a variety of needs and budgets. 

You’ll need to figure out how much you want to spend on health coverage each month.

Most people using the Marketplace will qualify to save money. To find out how much you’re 

eligible for when you apply, it will help to have these things close by:

•	 Social Security numbers (or document numbers for legal immigrants)

•	 Birth dates

•	 Pay stubs, W-2 forms, or “Wage and Tax Statements”

•	 Policy numbers for any current health insurance

•	 Information about any health insurance you or your family could get from your jobs

Marketplace resources to help you now

There are resources available right now to help you learn about types of health coverage, 

research your questions, and get ready to choose a health plan that gives you the right 

balance of costs and coverage. 

•	 Visit HealthCare.gov and subscribe to learn about key dates, news, and updates; or chat

online with a Marketplace Call Center representative. 

•	 Call the Marketplace Call Center at 1-800-318-2596. TTY users should call 1-855-889-4325.

•	 Like Facebook.com/HealthCareGov.

•	 Follow @HealthCareGov on Twitter.

CMS Product No. 11687

June 2013
----

**EXHIBIT        32.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

|   | 1. | The            Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of MTM Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”)            for the year ended March 31, 2006, which this certification accompanies            (the “Periodic Report”), fully complies with the requirements            of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|   | /s/                  Michael El-Hillow       |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|
|   | **Michael                  El-Hillow**       |
|   | **Chief                  Financial Officer** |

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 197 (Friday, October 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 52984]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26957]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-178-006]


Kern River Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

October 6, 1997.
    Take notice that on October 1, 1997, Kern River Gas Transmission 
Company (Kern River) tendered as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets for filing, to be 
effective on November 1, 1997:

Second Revised Sheet No. 73
Third Revised Sheet No. 94
First Revised Sheet No. 94-A
Second Revised Sheet No. 95
Second Revised Sheet No. 98
Second Revised Sheet Nos. 128-139, Sheet Nos. 140-199
First Revised Sheet No. 504-A

    Kern River states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with 
the Commission's order issued on June 27, 1997 in the above-listed 
docket (Order). The Order accepted Kern River's pro forma tariff sheets 
that were submitted May 1, 1997 to comply with the Commission's 
directives in Order No. 587-C, subject to some minor modifications.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission 
and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-26957 Filed 10-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3373 

To require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to extend the time 

period during which licensees are required to commence construction 

of certain hydropower projects. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 30, 2023 

Mr. DAINES (for himself, Mr. CASEY, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, and Mr. 

FETTERMAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to 

extend the time period during which licensees are required to commence construction of certain hydropower 

projects. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMMENCE CON4 STRUCTION OF CERTAIN HYDROPOWER 

5 PROJECTS. 

6 (a) DEFINITION OF COVERED PROJECT.—In this sec7 tion, the term ‘‘covered project’’ means a hydropower 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 3373 IS

1 project with respect to which the Federal Energy Regu2 latory Commission issued a license before March 13, 2020. 

3 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF EXTENSION.—Notwith4 standing section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 

5 806), on the request of a licensee of a covered project, 

6 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may, after 

7 reasonable notice and for good cause shown, extend in ac8 cordance with subsection (c) the period during which the 

9 licensee is required to commence construction of the cov10 ered project for an additional 4 years beyond the 8 years 

11 authorized by that section. 

12 (c) PERIOD OF EXTENSION.—An extension of time 

13 to commence construction of a covered project under sub14 section (b) shall— 

15 (1) begin on the date on which the final exten16 sion of the period for commencement of construction 

17 granted to the licensee under section 13 of the Fed18 eral Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) expires; and 

19 (2) end on the date that is 4 years after the lat20 est date to which the Federal Energy Regulatory 

21 Commission is authorized to extend the period for 

22 commencement of construction under that section. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
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 Shiloh Industries,
Inc. (the Company) on form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officers knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities 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 as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated:December 21,
2006



/s/    THEODORE K.
ZAMPETISTheodore K. Zampetis President and Chief Executive Officer/s/    STEPHEN E. GRAHAMStephen E. Graham Chief Financial Officer




The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### CAVALIER INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Sigmund SCHY, Robert Podhurst, Individually, and as Agent for Bridge Bindery, Inc., a Foreign Corporation, and Royal Globe Insurance Company, an Illinois Corporation, Appellees.

No. 76-1444.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 11, 1977.

Corlett, Merritt, Killian & Sikes and Donald W. Hardeman, Jr., Greene & Cooper, Miami, for appellant.

High, Stack, Davis & Lazenby and Alan R. Dakan, Miami, for appellees.

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

*570PER CURIAM.

The determinative issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying appellant, Cavalier Insurance Corporation, recovery on equitable distribution for PIP benefits it paid to appellee, Sigmund Schy.

After a hearing on appellee-Schy’s petition for equitable distribution, the trial court entered its order dissolving and extinguishing appellant’s lien and denying its right to any sums of money by way of equitable distribution which it had paid to Schy for PIP benefits. The order did not detail any equitable considerations upon which such holding was based.

We have considered the point on appeal in the light of the record, briefs and arguments of counsel, and have concluded that the order on the petition for equitable distribution must be reversed and the cause remanded for further consideration in light of the principles enumerated in *Williams v. Gateway Insurance Company,*331 So.2d 301 (Fla.1976), and *American Fire and Casualty Company v. Oller,*313 So.2d 67 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).

Reversed and remanded.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

RONALD G. DANDAR, )

)

Petitioner, )

) Civil Action No. 08-60 Erie

v. )

)

MARK KRYSEVIG et al., )

)

Respondents. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This petition for writ of habeas corpus was received by the Clerk of Court on

February 25, 2008 and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise

Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. 

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, filed on January 5, 2010

[114], recommends that the following motions filed by the Petitioner be denied:

1. “Motion for Declaratory Relief” [73]; 

2. “Motion for Declaratory Relief- Injunctive-TRO Relief” [77];

3. “Motion for Declaratory Judgment - TRO” [78];

4. “Motion for TRO-Declaratory-Injunctive Relief” [80];

5. “Motion for “Declaratory Relief” [94]; 

6. “Motion for Declaratory Judgment” [102]; 

7. “Motion for Declaratory Relief” [103];

8. “Motion for Declaratory Relief” [104];

9. “Motion for Declaratory Relief” [105]; and

10. “Motion for Declaratory Judgment” [106].

The parties were granted ten (10) days in which to file objections. Petitioner filed his

objections [118] on January 28, 2010. 

Case 1:08-cv-00060-SJM-SPB Document 119 Filed 02/05/10 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

After de novo review of the petition and documents in the case, together with the

Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and Petitioner’s objections thereto,

the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 5 day of February, 2010; th

IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s “Motion for Declaratory Relief” [73],

“Motion for Declaratory Relief- Injunctive-TRO Relief” [77], “Motion for Declaratory

Judgment - TRO” [78], “Motion for TRO-Declaratory-Injunctive Relief” [80], “Motion for

“Declaratory Relief” [94], “Motion for Declaratory Judgment” [102], “Motion for

Declaratory Relief” [103], “Motion for Declaratory Relief” [104], “Motion for Declaratory

Relief” [105], and “Motion for Declaratory Judgment” [106] be, and hereby are, DENIED.

The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter dated

January 5, 2010 [114] is adopted as the opinion of the Court.

 /s Sean J. McLaughlin 

SEAN J. McLAUGHLIN

United States District Judge

cm: All parties of record.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter 

Case 1:08-cv-00060-SJM-SPB Document 119 Filed 02/05/10 Page 2 of 2
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

MICHAEL RAY FUQUA, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 22-0102 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Navajo County

No. CR-2005-0569

The Honorable Michael D. Latham, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Navajo County Attorney’s Office, Holbrook

By Bradley W. Carlyon

Counsel for Respondent

Michael Ray Fuqua, Buckeye

Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, Judge James B. Morse Jr., and Judge 

Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court.

FILED 10-06-2022
STATE v. FUQUA

Decision of the Court

2

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Michael Ray Fuqua seeks review of the superior 

court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is 

petitioner’s second petition. 

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19, 278 P.3d 1276, 1280 (2012). It is 

petitioner’s burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by 

denying the petition for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 

537, ¶ 1, 260 P.3d 1102, 1103 (App. 2011) (petitioner has burden of 

establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of 

discretion.

¶4 We grant review and deny relief.
#### VERSAILLES PLAZA BUILDING CORP., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Adele RUBIN, et al., operators of a business enterprise known as Versailles Hotel, Appellees.

No. 69-178.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Sept. 17, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains  unaudited summary financial  information  extracted
from the Regisrant's  consolidated  financial statements for the 12 months ended
December  31,  1998  and is  qualified  in its  entirety  by  reference  to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000906609
<NAME>                        The Morgan Group, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<CASH>                                         1,490
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  12,396
<ALLOWANCES>                                   208
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               18,589
<PP&E>                                         6,938
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,821
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 33,387
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          14,783
<BONDS>                                        0
<COMMON>                                       41
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                                     13,180
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   33,387
<SALES>                                        150,454
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               150,454
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  148,447
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               485
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             545
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,462
<INCOME-TAX>                                   559
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            903
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   903
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .35
        

</TABLE>
#### Mrs. C. D. MILAM v. RIVERSIDE CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC.

No. 50179.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 22, 1978.

Parker, Averill, Funderburk & Butts, David Butts, Tupelo, for appellant.

Mitchell, McNutt, Bush, Lagrone & Sams, Guy W. Mitchell, III, Tupelo, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lee County; Neal Biggers, Judge.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., BROOM and BOWLING, JJ., and DARWIN MAPLES, Commissioner.

AFFIRMED.