alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-10326

Summary Calendar

ROSE ANN JUAREZ, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

HIGHLAND HOMES, LIMITED; REUNION TITLE; BANK OF AMERICA 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, formerly known as CWB Mortgage Ventures, 

L.L.C., doing business as Highland Loansource; MERS; PROVENCE AT 

FIREWHEEL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED, et al; 

SFTF HOLDINGS, L.L.C., et al, 

 Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CV-2173 

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Proceeding pro se, Rose Ann Juarez appeals the district court’s dismissal 

of her action seeking, inter alia, to enjoin the foreclosure of her property after

she defaulted on her mortgage payments. The district court dismissed all of 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 25, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-10326 Document: 00513355030 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/25/2016
No. 15-10326

2

Juarez’s claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) upon concluding that they 

were barred by res judicata in light of her previous lawsuit that involved 

substantially the same parties and the same transaction. In addition, the 

district court concluded that Juarez’s complaint had failed to allege sufficient 

facts stating a plausible claim against Reunion given that Reunion “was not a 

party to the mortgage, did not receive title to the Property, was not a payee, or 

the seller or lender of the Property, or a beneficiary to the deed of trust.” 

In her brief on appeal, Juarez identifies no error in the district court’s 

reasoning that her claims were barred by res judicata or that her complaint 

failed to state a claim against Reunion. Although we must liberally construe 

the briefs of pro se litigants, “pro se parties must still brief the issues and 

reasonably comply with the standards of Rule 28.” Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 

523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). Given her failure to adequately identify any error in 

the district court’s decision, Juarez’s brief does not comply with the Federal 

Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Toala v. Marriott White Lodging Corporate, 

456 F. App’x 476, 477 (5th Cir. 2012). Therefore, we DISMISS the appeal for 

want of prosecution. See id. 

 Case: 15-10326 Document: 00513355030 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/25/2016
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1876 

To amend the Uniform Time Act to make daylight savings time permanent. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 12, 2021 

Mr. CAWTHORN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend the Uniform Time Act to make daylight savings 

time permanent. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘SPF Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. MAKE DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME PERMANENT. 

6 Section 3(a) of the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 

7 U.S.C. 260a(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘During the pe8 riod commencing at 2 o’clock antemeridian on the second 

9 Sunday of March of each year and ending at 2 o’clock 

10 antemeridian on the first Sunday of November of each 

11 year’’ and inserting ‘‘Starting the first Sunday in NovemVerDate Sep 11 2014 21:13 May 11, 2021 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1876.IH H1876

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1876 IH

1 ber 2021 permanently advancing one hour and such time 

2 as so advanced shall for the purposes of such sections 261 

3 to 264, as so modified, be the standard time of such zone 

4 during such period’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASIDNGTON, D.C. 

MICHAEL HUERTA, 

ADMINISTRATOR, 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, 

Complainant, 

v. 

AIR MEDICAL RESOURCES GROUP, INC, 

Respondent. 

) 

) 

) 

) DMS No. FAA-2014-0552 

) FAA Case No. 2014WP910076 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) Judge: Richard C. Goodwin 

) 

) 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

The Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, hereby designates 

the following Agency Attorney as its representative in the captioned case: 

Adam Runkel, Attorney 

FAA, Office of the Chief Counsel 

Enforcement Division- Western Team 

1601 Lind Ave., S.W. 

Renton, WA 98056 

Phone (425) 227-2914 

Facsimile (425) 227-1007 

Email: adam.runkel@faa.gov 

This designation supersedes any previous designation of representation. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Peter J. Lynch 

Assistant Chief Counsel 

for Enforcement 

By: 

Adam Runkel 

Enforcement Division, Western Team 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certifY that the foregoing Notice of Appearance, in FAA Case No. 

2014 WP91 007 6, has been sent this date by facsimile and Certified Mail- Return Receipt 

Requested to: 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Fax: (202) 267-1293 

And that a true copy of the above has been sent this date by facsimile, Certified 

Mail- Return Receipt Requested, and e-mail this date, to the following: 

Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Bldg., Ground Floor, Room E11-310 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Fax: 202-366-7536 

Email: richard.goodwin@dot.gov 

And that a true copy of the above has been sent this date by facsimile, Certified 

Mail- Return Receipt Requested, and e-mail this date, to the following: 

Dated: 

Gregory S. Winton 

The Aviation Law Firm 

1997 Annapolis Exchange Parkway, Suite 300 

Annapolis, MD 21401 

Fax: 301-294-2525 

Email: greg@aviationlawexperts.com 

JAN 2 1 2016 

2
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1793 

To amend the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act to provide 

for immediate eligibility for former foster youth under Medicaid. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 11, 2021 

Ms. BASS (for herself, Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois, and Mr. MCGOVERN) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities 

Act to provide for immediate eligibility for former foster 

youth under Medicaid. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Immediate Coverage 

5 for Former Foster Youth Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROVIDING FOR IMMEDIATE MEDICAID ELIGI7 BILITY FOR FORMER FOSTER YOUTH. 

8 Section 1002(a)(2) of the SUPPORT for Patients 

9 and Communities Act (Public Law 115–271) is amended 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1793 IH

1 by striking ‘‘January 1, 2023’’ and inserting ‘‘the date 

2 of enactment of the Immediate Coverage for Former Fos3 ter Youth Act’’. 

4 SEC. 3. OUTREACH EFFORTS FOR ENROLLMENT OF 

5 FORMER FOSTER CHILDREN. 

6 Section 1902(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

7 1396a(a)) is amended— 

8 (1) in paragraph (85), by striking ‘‘; and’’ and 

9 inserting a semicolon; 

10 (2) in paragraph (86), by striking the period at 

11 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

12 (3) by inserting after paragraph (86) the fol13 lowing new paragraph: 

14 ‘‘(87) not later than January 1, 2022, establish 

15 an outreach and enrollment program, in coordination 

16 with the State agency responsible for administering 

17 the State plan under part E of title IV and any 

18 other appropriate or interested agencies, designed to 

19 increase the enrollment of individuals who are eligi20 ble for medical assistance under the State plan 

21 under paragraph (10)(A)(i)(IX) in accordance with 

22 best practices established by the Secretary.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Nasser Chehab, * From the 189 th District Court

of Harris County,

Trial Court No. 2020

- 17699

.

Vs. No. 11

- 20

- 00 1 8 0

- C V * June 16 , 20 2 2

William P

. Huttenbach and Hirsch & * Memorandum Opinion by Trotter , J.

Westheimer, P.C., (P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Trotter , J. , and W illiams, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion,

the judgment of the tr ia l court is in all things affirmed. The costs incurred by

reason of this appeal are taxed against Nasser Chehab

.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7095
LEROY J. BAXTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at A lexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-1610, CA-97-165) Submitted: October 23, 1997 Decided: November 17, 1997 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. LeRoy J. Baxter, Appellant Pro Se. Lance Bradford Leggitt, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) 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. Baxter v. Virginia Parole Bd. , Nos. CA-96-1610; CA-97-165 (E.D. Va. July 10, 1997). We deny Appellant's request for oral argument and dispense with argument because the f acts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Dr. O. B. CROCKER et al. v. FARMERS AND MERCHANTS BANK et al.

No. 49443.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

May 25, 1977.

Fant, Crutcher, Moore & Spencer, L. G. Fant, Jr., William C. Spencer, Holly Springs, Armis E. Hawkins, Houston, Ottis B. Crocker, Jr., Gibson & Newlin, Donald F. Newlin, Bruce, for appellants.

Yancy & Easley, C. R. Easley, Jr., Charles W. Cook, Bruce, Perry, Phillips, Crockett, Morrison & Herring, Rubel L. Phillips, Jackson, for appellees.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Calhoun County; Kermit R. Cofer, Chancellor.

Before GILLESPIE, C. J., and ROBERTSON and LEE, JJ.

AFFIRMED ON DIRECT AND CROSS-APPEALS.
EXHIBIT 32.1 – 906 CEO Certification








ROYAL INVEST INTERNATIONAL CORP.





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUNT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Quarterly Report of Royal Invest International Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jerry Gruenbaum, CEO of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.








By: /s/ Jerry Gruenbaum


Jerry Gruenbaum, CEO





August 23, 2010





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("Section 906"), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Royal Invest International Corp., and will be retained by Royal Invest International Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

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

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of CompuDyne Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A forthe period ended June 30, 2003 accompanying this certification and filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Geoffrey F. Feidelberg, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to thebest of my knowledge, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18U.S.C. § 1350, that:

 

1. The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  November 24, 2003 |                        |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------|
|                     |                        |
|                     | /s/ Geoffrey  F. Feidelberg |   |
|                     | Geoffrey F.  Feidelberg     |
|                     | Chief  Financial Officer    |

 

----
Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Plan

Item #1 

Does the application include an original signature of the plan sponsor or an authorized 

representative of the plan sponsor? 

See section 2.01. 

A letter with the original signature of the authorized trustee on behalf of the plan sponsor is 

attached as document 1.

1.0
1.1

Signature redacted by the US Department 

of the Treasury
#### Rita Carrie WALDRON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1079.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 4, 1977.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, Bar-tow, and Douglas A. Wallace, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and William I. Munsey, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court. However we agree with appellant that there are imperfections in his sentence. The present sentence does not specify the amount of credit for time served as required by Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975). *Brooks*v. *State,*349 So.2d 794 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Moreover, the phrase “at hard labor” in the sentence is improper. *Brooks v. State, supra.*The case is remanded in order to correct the sentence, and the appellant need not be present at that time.

GRIMES, Acting C. J., SCHEB, J., and McNULTY, JOSEPH P. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the As Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Helene Simonet, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Coherent, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended January 1, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Coherent, Inc.

 
| Date:   February 9, 2011                          |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                   |   |
|                                                   |   |
| /s/:   HELENE SIMONET                                  |   |
| Helene   Simonet                                       |   |
| Executive   Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 219 (Thursday, November 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60888-60889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29868]


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

DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMMISSION


Notice of Commission Meeting

    Notice is hereby given that the Delaware River Basin Commission 
will hold a regular business meeting on Wednesday, November 19, 1997. 
The meeting is open to the public and scheduled to begin at 1:30 p.m. 
in the Goddard Conference Room of the Commission's offices at 25 State 
Police Drive, West Trenton, New Jersey.
    The subjects of the meeting will be as follows:
    A. Minutes of the October 22, 1997 business meeting.
    B. Announcements.
    C. Report on Hydrologic Conditions in the Delaware River Basin. The 
report will include an update on the Basin's current drought warning 
status.
    D. General Counsel's Report.
    E. Jefferson Township Sewer Authority Docket No. D-97-6 CP. The 
Commission conducted public hearings on this project application on 
June 25 and July 28, 1997.
    F. A Resolution to Adopt the Commission's Annual Budgets for the 
Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1999 and to Apportion Among the Signatory 
Parties the Amounts Required for the Support of the Current Expense and 
Capital Budgets. A public hearing on this budget was held on October 
22, 1997.
    G. A Resolution to Amend the Administrative Manual--Rules of 
Practice and Procedure. The Commission conducted a public hearing on 
the proposed amendments to its

[[Page 60889]]

Rules of Practice and Procedure on October 22, 1997.
    H. Public Dialogue.

    Dated: November 3, 1997.
Susan M. Weisman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-29868 Filed 11-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6360-01-P
#### BRITTON v. BARRY.

No. 37976.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 213 So.2d 524.
#### MORSE TAXI COMPANY and Employers Service Corporation, Petitioners, v. Jack TUBER and the Florida Department of Commerce, Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.

No. 42775.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 21, 1972.

Certiorari denied.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON and ADKINS, JJ., concur.

BOYD, J., dissents.
TRIBAL 

TRANSPORTATION 

PROGRAM 

PORT

ANNUAL

REPORT

1
2

RECORDING
Questions?

3
Presenters

 David Garcia, FHWA OTT, Management and 

Program Analyst

 Blane Kunihisa, FHWA OTT, Management and 

Program Analyst

4
TTP Annual Report

5

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

Only required for ACTIVE 

projects Example link
TTP Annual Report

6
TTP Annual Report

7
TTP Annual Report

8
TTP Annual Report

9
TTP Annual Report

10
TTP Annual Report

11
TTP Annual Report

12
TTP Annual Report

13
TTP Annual Report

14
TTP Annual Report

15
TTP Annual Report

 Safety

 Transit

 Administration

 Maintenance

 Planning

16

Non-Construction Categories
TTP Annual Report

17
TTP Annual Report

18
TTP Annual Report

19
TTP Annual Report

20
TTP Annual Report

21
TTP Annual Report

22
TTP Annual Report

23
TTP Annual Report

24
TTP Annual Report

 Financial Report

 Non-Construction (STAMP) Report

 Project(s) Report

25
TTP Annual Report

26

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-tribal
Questions?

27
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 25 (Thursday, February 6, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 5630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2976]



[[Page 5630]]

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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
[FEMA-1154-DR]


Idaho; Amendment to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of Idaho, (FEMA-1154-DR), dated January 4, 1997, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 27, 1997

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster for the State 
of Idaho, is hereby amended to include the following areas among those 
areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe 
declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of 
January 4, 1997:

    The counties of Boise, Gem and Idaho for Hazard Mitigation and 
Categories C, D, E, F, and G under the Public Assistance program. 
Federal assistance to replace trees is not eligible. (These counties 
have already been designated for Individual Assistance and 
Categories A and B under the Public Assistance program).

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 83.516, Disaster 
Assistance)
Lacy E. Suiter,
Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 97-2976 Filed 2-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 216 (Friday, November 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 60311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29510]



[[Page 60311]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION


Updated Advisement of Operational Status of Grand Trunk Western 
Bridge at Mile 19.16 Over the Saginaw River in Saginaw, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is issuing this notice to advise the boating 
public that a formerly movable bridge over the Saginaw River was 
authorized to be placed in a non-movable status in 1982, and has 
remained in that status ever since.

DATES: Comments must be received by December 8, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Any comments or documents should be sent to Commander (obr), 
Ninth Coast Guard District, 1240 East Ninth Street, Room 2019, 
Cleveland, OH 44199-2060.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Robert W. Bloom, Chief, Bridge Branch at (216) 902-6084.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A railroad swing span bridge at mile 19.16 
over the Saginaw River in Saginaw, MI, was permitted for construction 
in 1913. Between 1972 and 1982 there was only one opening of this 
bridge. The one opening was for a special Bicentennial exhibition in 
1976. At the request of the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Co., current 
owner of the bridge, the regulations governing the operations of the 
bridge were reviewed and revised in 1982. By that time, all commercial 
marine activity had ceased to transit that portion of the Saginaw 
River. The 1982 regulation allowed the bridge to remain closed to 
vessel traffic. See 47 FR 4065, dated January 28, 1982. Persons wishing 
to express their views concerning the status of this bride may do so by 
sending their comments to the office listed under ADDRESSES above. 
Comments must be received by December 8, 1997.

    Dated: October 6, 1997.
J.F. McGowan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 97-29510 Filed 11-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M