alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 219 (Thursday, November 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 60935]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29903]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Flight Standards District Office at Scottsdale, AZ; Certificate 
Management Office at Phoenix, AZ; Notice of Consolidation

    Notice is hereby given that on or about November 10, 1997, the 
Flight Standards District Office at Scottsdale, Arizona and the 
Certificate Management Office at Phoenix, Arizona will be consolidated 
as Arizona Flight Standards District Office. Services to the general 
public of Arizona will continue to be provided by the new organization 
at the same physical locations. This information will be reflected in 
the FAA Organizational Statement the next time it is reissued.

(Sec. 313(a), 72 Stat. 752; 49 U.S.C. 1354.)

    Issued in Los Angeles, CA, on October 27, 1997.
Lynore C. Brekke,
Acting Regional Administrator, Western-Pacific Region.
[FR Doc. 97-29903 Filed 11-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0557

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

vs. 

QUINCY DEAN PFISTER,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including April 10, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 4 2024

03/04/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0557
CHARTERED

1100  1177 West Hastings Street

ACCOUNTANTS

Vancouver, B.C.  V6E 4T5

MacKay LLP

Tel: 604-687-4511

Fax: 604-687-5805

Toll Free: 1-800-351-0426

www.MacKayLLP.ca







December 22, 2003

Our file No. 823 1290



Mr. Cameron King

RedCell Power Corporation

440 Stevens Drive

West Vancouver BC V7S 1C6





Dear Sirs:



Re:

Interim Quarterly financial statements for RedCell Power Corporation



We have performed a limited review of the interim financial statements of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2003.   Our limited review was solely to conform to the US Securities Exchange Commission Item 310(b) of Regulation S-B and should not be used or referred to for any other purpose.



We have not issued a report for the limited review.  If, in any filing with the SEC, the company states that the interim financial statements have been reviewed by an independent public accountant, a report must be filed with the interim financial statements.





Yours truly,

MacKay LLP





Sean Gilbert



Sean Gilbert, CA

Partner





Q:\82301290\#wp\letters\march 2003review(signed)
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 220 (Friday, November 14, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61010-61011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29968]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96-ANE-35; Amendment 39-10134; AD 97-19-13]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney JT8D-200 Series 
Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

[[Page 61011]]

SUMMARY: This document makes a correction to Airworthiness Directive 
(AD) 97-19-13 applicable to Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-200 series 
turbofan engines that was published in the Federal Register on 
September 19, 1997 (62 FR 49135). The paragraph references to the 
Accomplishment Instructions of PW Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 
5944, Revision 3, dated December 16, 1994, in paragraph (a)(3) of the 
compliance section are incorrect. This document corrects the paragraph 
references. In all other respects, the original document remains the 
same.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 14, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Spinney, Aerospace 
Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller 
Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; 
telephone (781) 238-7175, fax (781) 238-7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A final rule airworthiness directive 
applicable to Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-200 series turbofan engines, 
was published in the Federal Register on September 19, 1997 (62 FR 
49135). The following correction is needed:


Sec. 39.13  [Corrected]

    On page 49136, in the third column, in the Compliance Section, in 
paragraph (a)(3), in the sixth line, ``2.A.(2) (c) and (d) or (f) and 
(g)'' is corrected to read ``2.A.(2) (a) and (b) or (d) and (e)''.

    Issued in Burlington, MA, on November 6, 1997.
Jay J. Pardee,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 97-29968 Filed 11-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

November 1, 2023

No. 04

- 23

- 00790

- CV

IN RE Monique HEMPHILL , as Executor of Estate of Leola Mae Moton

Original Proceeding 1

ORDER

On August 24, 2023, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. However, relator and

real party in interest have reached an agreement on the issues raised in relator’s petition, and relator

has filed a notice of nonsuit stating this mandamus proceeding should be dismissed.

Accordingly, we DISMISS AS MOOT this mandamus proceeding in accordance with the

relator’s notice of nonsuit.

We FURTHER ORDER costs of appeal assessed against the party incurring same.

It is so ORDERED on November 1, 2023

.

_____________________________ Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 1st day of November, 2023

.

_____________________________ Michael A. Cruz

, Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2009 PC 3816 , styled In the Estate of Jerry D. Moton, Deceased , pending in

the Probate Court No. 2

, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Veronica Vasquez presiding.
Exhibit 23.2








March 23, 2011








Consent of Independent Engineers





We refer to our report entitled “Evaluation of the P&NG Reserves of Advantage Oil & Gas Ltd. (As of December 31, 2010)”, dated February 16, 2011 (the “Report”).





We hereby consent to the use of our name and references to excerpts from the Report in the Annual Report on Form 40-F of Advantage Oil & Gas Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2010.








Sincerely,



SPROULE ASSOCIATES LIMITED







By:
/s/ Cameron P. Six, P. EngName:  Cameron P. Six, P. Eng

Title:  Manager, Engineering
#### Edwin H. SOMERS, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION and A. J. Stack, Respondents.

No. 69-819.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 15, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-29-2000
<CASH>                                           3,479
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,212
<ALLOWANCES>                                       661
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,915
<PP&E>                                           3,632
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,339
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  22,845
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,417
<BONDS>                                          2,244
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            38
<OTHER-SE>                                     (10,033)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    22,845
<SALES>                                         13,922
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,922
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,444
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,865
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (575)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 267
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (5,079)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         2
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5,081)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5,081)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.33)


</TABLE>
**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 March 31, 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    |

 

----
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-14-00809- CV
David Albers, Appellan t

v. Jam es Russell F rost, Appellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 53RD J UDICIAL DI STRICT NO. D-1 -GN-1 4-0 0020 7, H ONO RAB LE DARLENE BY RNE, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
David Albers filed his notice of appea l on Dec ember 22, 2014. On Marc h 25, 2015, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that his b ri ef wa s overdue and that his appea l was subject to dismissal for want of prosec ution if he failed to file his brief or respond to the notice by Ap ri l 6 , 2 0 1 5. To date, appellant has neither filed his brief nor responde d to this Court’s notice. Acc ording ly , we dismiss this appeal for w ant of prose cution. SeeTex. R. App. P . 42.3(b), ( c).

__________________________________________ J eff Rose, Chief J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Rose, Jus tices Goodwin a nd Field Dismissed for Want of Prosecution Filed: Apr il 17, 2015
WILLIE VANDYKE WILSON, JR , Appellant,

v. STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
CASE NO. 1D 14

- 586

_____________________________/ Opinion filed June 9, 2015. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. Gary L. Bergosh , Judg e
. Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Joanna A. Mauer, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee , for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Michael McDermott, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. We affirm, without discussion, Appellant’s convictions and sentences for possession of a controlled substance; resisting a law enforcement officer without violence; and driving while license is cancelled, suspended or revoked

– second2 conviction. However, we conclude, and the State properly concedes, the trial court erred by imposing a Public Defender lien of $150 without providing Appellant an opportunity to contest it. See §938.29(5), Fla. Stat.; Fla. R. Crim. P. 3

. 720(d)(1) (“Notice of the accused’s ri ght to a hearing to contest the amount of the lien shall be given at the time of sentence.”); see also Vaughn v. State , 65 So. 3d 138, 139 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (“[T]he State properly concedes that the Public Defender lien fee
should be stricken because the trial court did not advise [the defendant] of his right to a hearing to contest the amount of the fees.”). We therefore remand for the trial court to either strike the $150 Public Defender lien or give Appellant the opportunity

to contest the amount of th e lien. See Chestnut v. State , 145 So. 3d 193, 194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.

THOMAS , MARSTILLER , and BILBREY , J J

. , CONCUR.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000741612
<NAME> TNP ENTERPRISES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      907,634
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      4,243
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          26,677
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        62,136
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,000,690
<COMMON>                                       197,887
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            133,771
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 331,658
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,534
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           361,264
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  100,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 206,234
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                1,000,690
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      124,526
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             3,579
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     103,508
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     107,087
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         17,439
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 334
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  17,773
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        10,514
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,259
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          5
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                    7,254
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         3,921
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        9,626
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         (11,888)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# Transactions Report - CPP

# CPP Footnotes

# CPP - Citi

Page &P of &N

# CDCI

Page &P of &N

# AIFP.ASSP

Page &P of &N

# AIFP - GM

# TIP.AGP

Page &P of &N

# AIG

Page &P of &N

# TALF

Page &P of &N

# SBA

Page &P of &N

# PPIP

Page &P of &N
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 222 (Tuesday, November 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 61552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30261]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

Job Training Partnership Act, Title III, Demonstration Program: 
Labor Organization Adjustment Assistance; Correction

AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Correction.

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

SUMMARY: In notice document FR Doc. 97-28830 Filed 10-30-97; 8:45 a.m. 
beginning on page 58984 in the issue of Friday, October 31, 1997, make 
the following correction:
    On page 58985, in the second column, Part II., (A) Eligible 
Applicants (1) reads: ``Provide exclusive representation to the target 
population to be served through collective bargaining agreements in 
effect at the time of the effective date of worker layoff or 
termination.'' This should be replaced with: ``(1) Act as the exclusive 
bargaining agent for the target population to be served;''
    On page 58986, in the third column, Part III. Statement of Work, 
(A) Target Population, second paragraph reads: ``Indicate the beginning 
and the end dates of the collective bargaining agreement(s) under which 
the target population was covered at the time of the workers' layoff or 
termination and the labor organization(s) and company(ies) who were the 
parties to the agreements(s).'' This paragraph should be replaced with: 
``Provide documentation showing that you have been designated as the 
exclusive agent to represent the target population.''

    Dated: November 4, 1997.
Janice E. Perry,
Grant Officer, Employment and Training Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-30261 Filed 11-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
```
#### CYPRESS CORPORATION OF FLORIDA v. SMITH.

No. 38328.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 218 So.2d 481.
* 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

April 12, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50713

Summary Calendar

ELEAZAR GONZALEZ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

ERNESTO GONZALEZ, 

SUK CHA GONZALEZ, 

doing business as Hong Kong Buffet,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(USDC No. 1:05-cv-223)

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

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant won below on his FLSA claim and appeals only the

district court’s calculation of his damage award. The over-time

provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act require an employer to

pay covered workers “at a rate of not less than one and one-half

times the regular rate at which he is employed.” 29 U.S.C. §

207(a)(1). Appellant argues that his “regular rate” should have

been calculated by dividing his weekly salary by the number of

hours he worked per week — a rate which exceeded minimum wage. He
No. 04-30852

-2-

explains that his overtime wages should have been calculated based

on this rate and the number of overtime hours work.

The district court, however, assumed that the plaintiff was

hired for the minimum wage, and that any extra money provided by

his fixed salary was intended to partially compensate for overtime.

The district court calculated the overtime rate based on the

minimum wage, and deducted from plaintiff’s overtime wages the

partial compensation. As a result of the district court’s

approach, plaintiff argues that he is owed an additional $6,804.85

in wages and $6,804.85 in liquidated damages. 

There was a trial below and testimony about the parties’

intent. Yet the plaintiff argues that “it is indisputable that the

district court was itself deeming the Plaintiff’s hourly wage to be

the minimum wage of $5.15 as a matter of law, rather than finding

that this wage somehow represented the intent of the parties.”

(emphasis added).

We disagree. The district court found that “the twice monthly

payments were intended to cover all hours worked, including regular

hours and overtime.” (emphasis added). It further found that “the

raises were intended to compensate plaintiffs for overtime hours

worked.” (emphasis added). Plaintiff’s efforts to transform this

into a legal question are inconsistent with the record. We review

a district court’s factual findings for clear error, which

plaintiff does not even attempt to show. The judgment of the

district court is 
No. 04-30852

-3-

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT
32.01
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Colonial Commercial Corp.
(the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William Pagano,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to section 18 U.S.C.
1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:
 
 1.
              The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and
 
 2.
              The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
 
 
 By:
              /s/ William PaganoName:
              William
      PaganoChief
      Executive OfficerDate:
      August 8, 2008
10.27 Severability Clause 

If any section, provision, or other part of this Ordinance shall be adjudged invalid or 

unconstitutional said adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a 

whole or any section, provision, or other part thereof not adjudged invalid or 

unconstitutional. 

10.28 When Effective 

This Ordinance shall become effective upon publication. 

Approved by the Linn County Board of Supervisors the 28t" day of January, 2015. 

icb- airtS6rso`h Ben Rogers 

District 3 

~~;r>~/~I _ ~~-►~ 

S~ervisor James Houser 

Di 

~ 

upervisor Brent Oleson 

District 4 

~ 

upervisor John Harris 

District 5 

ATTEST: > 

r---~ 

/ 

1 ~- , 

J I Miller, Linn County Au ' or 

`T 0 

Dates read: January 19, 2015 January 21, 2015 January 27, 2015 

Published in the Cedar Rapids Gazette on 04"n, ~ , 2015 

f— 

Page 108 of 108 Linn County Ordinance #1-1-2015