alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 223 (Wednesday, November 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 61860]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30381]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision
[AC-35: OTS No. 00770]


First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Cheraw, Cheraw, 
South Carolina, Approval of Conversion Application

    Notice is hereby given that on November 12, 1997, the Director, 
Corporate Activities, Office of Thrift Supervision, or her designee, 
acting pursuant to delegated authority, approved the application of 
First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Cheraw, Cheraw, South 
Carolina, to convert to the stock form of organization. Copies of the 
application are available for inspection at the Dissemination Branch, 
Office of Thrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20552, 
and the Southeast Regional Office, Office of Thrift Supervision, 1475 
Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30309.

    Dated: November 14, 1997.

    By the Office of Thrift Supervision.
Nadine Y. Washington,
Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-30381 Filed 11-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-M
ex-10.2

 Michael Kelly
 7145 Sagebrush Drive
 Parker, Colorado 80138
 

 

 January 26, 2018
 

 Spindle Board of Directors
 1201 S. Alma School Rd., Suite 12500
 Mesa, AZ 85210
 

 Re: Resignation as Board Member
 

 Dear Board,
 

 Please accept this as my immediate resignation from Spindle's Board of Directors (the "Board"). My resignation from the Board is due to the following activities of Spindle's management:
 

 ·
 Misrepresenting to the board of material facts regarding acquisition targets;
 ·
 Committing Spindle to transactions in which Spindle's performance is wholly impractical due to fiscal challenges;
 ·
 Providing the Board with misleading forecasts and memorandum;
 ·
 Entering into agreements, financing agreements, accepting undocumented loans, without consent of the board;
 ·
 Signing resolutions of the Board without Board consent; and
 ·
 Generally precluding my fulfillment of my fiduciary duties as a member of the
 ·
 Board.
 

 I hope you work to correct these problems as soon as possible to provide value to Spindle's shareholders.
 

 Sincerely,
 

 /s/ Michael Kelly
 Michael Kelly
K·l····RI\ ·-·cK __ ,..rS_v_Vfij 9

Fl ..-L._·:L:-. ·E-, · :-' . ___ ·_.·_._·.!'. "··- •. , .. t-'4 •· " ~.., ...,., ··"""' "-=-~,- ~..v. ?-~ ~ ..,. u.,..,.. ....... ·: '<>»-<. ·"'" "'"" '- "" -'< --. .,.~..,. ..,_...,......., ., <~<_ .:)<} ""'"·"'-..~ ·..-.--=: <Y.< ""'! .·:;; ..-~:::..:Y:?;t.."W '-'-"" ':'·· _,,_,.. ..__ ,_.,h,·~ ..•. .,..·>' -~ .-•• ..,._,.__._ ••••• • • · 

' t' > . ·, ! 

·-···- ··· · ··· -- ·· ·· -:- ;, ...,., - , ·, ! · Administration 660.627.1225 • Human Resources 660.627.1458 

· ·. '- ' : >· C' ':":: : ~ .' Economic & Community Development 660.627 .1224 

.... ; 7 ' ! . j .. 

:-: .. ·:. '• · . I . l 

June 27, 2012 

Dennis DeVany, Chief 

Essential Air Service & Domestic Analysis 

Department of Transportation, Room 6401 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Mr. UeVany: 

The Kirksville City Council, at their regular meeting of June 27, 2012, voted to opt out of 

the 15-seat requirement that is currently under the essential air service guidelines. The 

City Council is recommending that Cape Air continue services at the Kirksville Regional 

Airport with nine-seat service. 

We greatly appreciate your support and assistance. 

Sincerely, 

~f.OL~ Richard L. Detweiler 

Mayor 

. . : ' 

201 S. Franklin • Kirksville, Missouri 63501 

Toll Free: 888.299.1223 • Fax: 660.665.0940 • www.kirksvillecity.com
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0323

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

RANDY VAUGHN SNEED,

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 January 5, 2022, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 6 2021

12/06/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0323
inseArticle (a)(3)

DWS INTERNATIONAL FUND, INC.

ARTICLES SUPPLEMENTARY

 

DWS International Fund, Inc., a Maryland corporation registered as an open-end investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (which is hereinafter called the “Corporation”), hereby certifies to the State Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland that:

 

FIRST:  Pursuant to the authority expressly vested in the Board of Directors of the Corporation by the Charter of the Corporation, the Board of Directors has duly designated and classified all of the authorized shares of the DWS Pacific Opportunities Equity Fund series of the Corporation’s capital stock, all of which are unissued, into undesignated and unclassified shares of the capital stock of the Corporation.

 

SECOND:  (a) Immediately prior to the filing of these Articles Supplementary, the Corporation had the authority to issue two billion four hundred forty seven million nine hundred twenty three thousand eight hundred eighty eight (2,447,923,888) shares of capital stock, with a par value of $0.01 per share, for an aggregate par value of Twenty Four Million Four Hundred Seventy Nine Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Eight Dollars and Eighty Eight Cents ($24,479,238.88), which shares were designated and classified into the following Series, which Series were subdivided into the following Classes: 

 

| Series | Classes | Number of Shares |
|--------|---------|------------------|

 

| DWS International Fund | 620,595,597 |
|------------------------|-------------|

 

|   | Class A shares | 100,000,000 |
|--------|----------------|-------------|

|   | Class B shares | 50,000,000 |
|--------|----------------|------------|

|   | Class C shares | 20,000,000 |
|--------|----------------|------------|

|   | Class S shares | 200,595,597 |
|--------|----------------|-------------|

|   | Class AARP shares | 100,000,000 |
|--------|-------------------|-------------|

|   | Institutional Class shares | 50,000,000 |
|--------|----------------------------|------------|

|   | Investment Class shares | 100,000,000 |
|--------|-------------------------|-------------|

 

DWS Pacific Opportunities 

| Equity Fund | 320,000,000 |
|-------------|-------------|

 

|   | Class A shares | 50,000,000 |
|--------|----------------|------------|

|   | Class B shares | 50,000,000 |
|--------|----------------|------------|

|   | Class C shares | 20,000,000 |
|--------|----------------|------------|

|   | Class S shares | 100,000,000 |
|--------|----------------|-------------|

|   | Class AARP shares | 100,000,000 |
|--------|-------------------|-------------|

 

| DWS Latin America Equity Fund | 340,000,000 |
|-------------------------------|-------------|

 

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 221 (Monday, November 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 61304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30047]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Board of Visitors Meeting

AGENCY: Department of Defense Acquisition University, DOD.

ACTION: Board of visitors meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The next meeting of the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) 
Board of Visitors (BoV) will be held at the Defense Systems Management 
College (DSMC), 9000 Belvoir Road, Building 184, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 
on Tuesday, December 2, 1997 from 0830 until 1600. The purpose of this 
meeting is to report back to the BoV on continuing items of interest 
and discuss the DAU distance learning initiatives. The agenda will 
include continuing discussions concerning acquisition research, 
development of the continuing acquisition education policy, and the 
development of the DAU distance learning program plan and schedule.
    The meeting is open to the public; however, because of space 
limitations, allocation of seating will be made on a first-come, first 
served basis. Persons desiring to attend the meeting should call Mrs. 
Joyce Reniere at (703) 805-5134.

    Dated: November 10, 1997.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate, OSD Federal Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-30047 Filed 11-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
#### Freda ROSENHOLZ, Appellant, v. Raleigh JAMES, Appellee.

No. 73-373.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 27, 1973.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; John G. Ferris, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Douglas E. WIEDEMAN, Appellant, v. Raymond Arthur MICKEL and Gail West Mickel, Appellees.

No. 72-358.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 11, 1972.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 10, 1972.

William J. Castagna, of MacKenzie, Castagna, Bennison & Gardner, Clearwa-ter, for appellant.

Robert R. Tench, Clearwater, for appel-lees.

MANN, Judge.

The judgment of adoption, terminating the right of appellant, the girl’s natural father, cannot be upheld consistently with the law as declared by our Supreme Court. Torres v. Van Eepoel, Fla.1957, 98 So.2d 735; Wiggins v. Rolls, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 414; In re Whetstone, 1939, 137 Fla. 712, 188 So. 576. See also In re Prangley, Fla.App.2d 1960, 122 So.2d 423; Roy v. Holmes, Fla.App.2d 1959, 111 So.2d 468; Annot., 35 A.L.R.2d 662.

The home of her aunt and uncle, who have kept her since her mother’s death, and in which she wishes to remain, is probably preferable. She does well in school, is active in her church and happy. But the father’s home is concededly suitable. The evidence that he abandoned her after his divorce from her mother is simply inadequate.

Reversed and remanded.

LILES, Acting C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

MANN, Judge.

Appellees suggest that we have overlooked In re Vincent, Fla.App. 1st 1961, 219 So.2d 454. We have not. In that case the natural father had never seen the child during its first five years, and was so indifferent to its welfare that a decree of adoption was properly granted the child’s stepfather, the only father she had ever known. That case is completely different from this one. There is in this record some evidence of laxity in providing support, but not enough to support a finding of abandonment, and an effort to make much of the father’s allowing his present wife to write the child on behalf of both of them, a circumstance appellees are unwilling to credit even slightly to the *54appellant. The child was in fairly regular communication with her father and stepmother. There is no basis for a finding of abandonment, actual or constructive, on this record.

The other point urged upon us on petition for rehearing concerns a question not involved in this appeal.

Rehearing denied.

LILES, Acting C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON



### N OTICE OF 

### I NTENT TO 

### D ISMISS FOR 

### W ANT OF 

### J URISDICTION

AND 

### O RDER ON 

### M OTION FOR 

### E XTENSION OF 

### T IME

Appellate case name: In the Interest of T. L. B. , A. J. and L. J. v. Department of Family and

Protective Services

Appellate case number: 01

- 20

- 00655

- CV

Trial court case number: 2019

- 02943J

Trial court: 313th District Court of Harris County

Upon reviewing the record, t he Court notif ies the parties that this appeal may be dismissed

for want of jurisdiction because t he record does not contain either a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.3(a) ; Lehmann v. Har

- Con Corp ., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001)

. Appellant L.W.’s pending motion for an extension of time to file her brief confirms that “no order, interlocutory or otherwise, has been entered to this day” and “this appeal was filed prematurely, before entry of the final order.”

Accordingly, the Court may dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction unless you file a written response to this notice providing a detailed explanation, citing relevant portions of the record, statutes, rules, and case law, showing that this Court has jurisdiction over the appeal. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). Any r esponse must be filed within 7 days of the date of this

notice

. Briefing deadlines are ordered stayed pending the determination of our jurisdiction over the appeal. Accordingly, appellant’s motion for an extension of time to file her brief is dismissed

as moot.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

___

/s/ Sarah B. Landau

_____

Acting individually

Date:

__ December 3, 2020

_____
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 00916**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  x 

### 00916\00916_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook



### 00916\00916_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 00916\00916_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 

### 00916\00916_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 00916\00916_Part E.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 00916\00916_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file



### 00916\Certification Statement_00916.pdf Plant certification statement x 

### 00916\FW EPA Questions for Caledonia.rtf Draft Questions for Follow Up x 

### 00916\Supporting Documentation\00916_CCC ICR Flow Schematic Source Diagram September 2010.ppt Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 

### 00916\Supporting Documentation\00916_CCC ICR Flow Schematic Source Diagram September 2010.pptx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey



### 00916\Supporting Documentation\00916_CCT COVERMEMO.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 00916\Supporting Documentation\00916_CT FONSI - Revised for Leasing (2).pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 00916\Supporting Documentation\00916_EA Combustion Turbine.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 00916\Supporting Documentation\00916_fonsi.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 00916\Supporting Documentation\00916_INFO TABLE - NEPA CT Capacity Purchases - Cogentrix Caledo.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 00916\Supporting Documentation\caledonia.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
**Exhibit 31.1**

Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

 

I,Perry A. Glassgow, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D requiredto be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-Kof Harley-Davidson Motorcycle Trust 2009-4 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.               Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report isincluded in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.               I amresponsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and, basedon my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicercompliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB,and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer hasfulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement; and

 

5.               All of thereports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backedsecurities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliancewith servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included inthis report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

Ingiving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on informationprovided to me by the following unaffiliated party: The Bank of New York MellonTrust Company, N.A.

 
|   | HARLEY-DAVIDSON  MOTORCYCLE TRUST 2009-4 |
|--------|------------------------------------------|
|   |                                     |
|   |                                     | By: | Harley-Davidson Credit  Corp., as Servicer |
|   |                                     |   |   |
|   |                                     | By: | /s/ Perry A. Glassgow |
|   |                                     | Perry A. Glassgow |
|   |                                     | Vice President,  Treasurer and Assistant Secretary  (senior officer in charge of the servicing function) |

 

March 25, 2010

 

----
#### Carpenter *v.*Smith et al.

*Supreme Court—Dismissals—No constitutional question involved.*

(No. 18125

Decided November 27, 1923.)

Error to the Court of Appeals of Cuyahoga county.

*Mr. David B. \Carpenter, in propri-a persona.*

*Mr. WilUam H.*Chapman, for defendant in error Ruth Smith.

*Mr. C. C. Crabbe,*attorney general, and *Mr. David E. Green,*for defendant in error The Industrial Commission of Ohio.

*Mr. George H. Phelps, amicus curiae.*

It is ordered and adjudged that the petition in error be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Marshall, C. J., Wanamaker, Robinson, Jones, Matthias, Day and Allen, JJ., concur.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 8 E0 04 0 . DANI ELLE ROLLI NS v . GLEN ROLLI NS.

Ch ri s A. C o r

b e t t , co u n sel fo r Dan i el l e Ro l li n s , h as fi l ed a req u es t fo r an

ex t en s i o n o f t i m e t o fi l e a di scret i o n ary ap p li cat i o n un t il Ap ri l 3 0
, 2 0 1 8. Sai d req u es t
i s h ereb y GRANTED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i t n e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 

## March 30, 2018

03/30/2018
#### Ronald Ray RUSS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. R-403.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 14, 1973.

Louis O. Frost, Jr., Public Defender, Thomas C. Turner, Ronald B. Cosgrove and James O. Brecher, Asst. Public Defenders, for Appellant.

*74Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., for Ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of the trial court’s order revoking his probation and sentencing him to five years imprisonment.

We have given full consideration to the record on appeal, briefs and oral argument submitted by the parties. It appearing therefrom that appellant has failed to demonstrate that prejudicial error was committed in the proceedings below, the order appealed herein is affirmed.

WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 Form 10-K of Promap Corporation, a company duly formed under the laws of Colorado (the "Company"), for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Steven A. Tedesco, President (Chief Executive Officer) of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, 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:  March 29, 2011 /s/ Steven A. Tedesco Steven A. Tedesco Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)   This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Promap Corporation and will be retained by Promap Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Joseph Edward HALL and Richard Bruce Blalock, Appellees.

No. GG-350.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 8, 1977.

*941Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Richard W. Prospect, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, and Margaret Good, Asst. Public Defender, for appellees.

McCORD, Chief Judge.

This interlocutory appeal is from an order suppressing evidence — a baggie of marijuana and battery jumper cables.

Police officers, while investigating the tripping of a silent burglar alarm at a filling station, found appellees working on their truck on the filling station premises where they had remained with permission of the owner following his closing of the station earlier that evening. While the officers were checking appellees’ drivers licenses for their identities and checking the building in connection with a possible burglary, appellees became belligerent and began yelling profanities at the officers in loud voices. They were arrested for breach of the peace, and one officer went over to their truck to make an inventory search of it prior to its impoundment. A door of the truck was open, and before beginning a search, the officer saw a baggie of marijuana in plain view on the floorboard. The vehicle was then completely searched, and battery jumper cables were found behind the seat. Upon the owner’s arrival at the station, he identified the jumper cables as having been taken from his station. Appel-lee contends the search was illegal — that the arrest of appellees for breach of the peace was not a legal arrest and, therefore, there was no basis for a search as an incident to it; that even if the arrest was legal, the search of the vehicle was not justified as a search incident to the arrest; that there was no justification for an inventory search.

It is unnecessary that we determine the legality of the arrest or the search as an incident to the arrest or the legality of the search as an inventory search. The officer had the right to be in the vicinity of the truck while conducting his investigation of the apparent burglary. When, before entering the vehicle, the officer saw the baggie of marijuana on the floorboard in plain view, such created probable cause to believe that the vehicle was carrying contraband. The search of the vehicle for additional contraband was then fully justified. See *Sheff v. State,*329 So.2d 270 (Fla.1976); *State v. Nieman,*292 So.2d 610 (Fla. 4 DCA 1974); *Beck v. State,*181 So.2d 659 (Fla. 2 DCA 1966); *Carroll v. U. S.,*267 U.S. 132, 45 S.Ct. 280, 69 L.Ed. 543 (1925).

REVERSED.

BOYER and MELVIN, JJ., concur.