alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 63180]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30978]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of 1984.
    Interested parties can review or obtain copies of agreements at the 
Washington, DC offices of the Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, 
N.W., Room 692. Interested parties may submit comments on an agreement 
to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, by 
December 8, 1997.
    Agreement No.: 202-008900-063.
    Title: The ``8900'' Lines Agreement.
    Parties:

    The National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabia
    United Arab Shipping Company (S.A.G.)
    DSR-Senator Lines
    A.P. Moller-Maersk Line
    Sea-Land Service, Inc.
    P&O Nedlloyd Limited

    Synopsis: The proposed modification to Article 14 of the Agreement 
authorizes any party or any group of parties to enter into individual 
service contracts and deletes the current prohibition on such 
contracts. The modification also expands and clarifies current 
guidelines applicable to service contracts.

    Agreement No.: 217-011595.
    Title: TBS/Oceanica Space Charter Agreement.
    Parties:

    TBS North America Liner, Ltda. (``TBS'')
    Comercial Maritima Oceanica Ltd. (``Oceanica'')

    Synopsis: The proposed Agreement authorizes Oceanica to charter 
space to TBS on a maximum of six vessels it will operate from United 
States ports, and U.S. inland and coastal points served via such ports, 
to ports and points in Central America, South America and the Caribbean 
Sea. It also authorizes the parties to agree on transshipment 
arrangements and to cooperate with respect to terminals and equipment.

    Dated: November 20, 1997.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-30978 Filed 11-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
255 La. 913

#### Mrs. Bertile ARDOIN v. CROWN ZELLERBACH CORPORATION and Walter A. Zwilling.

No. 50488.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 20, 1970.

In re: Mrs. Bertile Ardoin applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Evangeline. 232 So.2d 136.

Writ refused. On the .facts found by the Court of Appeal the result is correct.
# • FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION COMPLIANCE WITH E.O. 12866 Section 6(a)(3)(E) ofE. O. 12866 requires agencies to id entify for the public, in a comp lete, clear, an d simple manner, tho se changes in a regulatory action made at the s uggestion or recomm endation of the Offi ce of Information and Regu latory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Managem e nt and Budget. 

### Title of Rulemaking: 

### Temporary Fl i ght Restrictions in the Proximity of Launch and Reentry Operations Regulatory Identification Number : 2120-AK66
OIRA did not review the rulemaking document.

OIRA revie wed the ru lemaking document , but did not s ugges t or recommend any changes.
OIRA reviewed the rul emaki ng document , and we have documented the cha nges we made at O I RA's sugges tion or recommendation in a n attachment to th is sheet.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>  UT
<CIK>                         0000741612
<NAME>                        TNP Enterprises, Inc.
             
                        
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
                          
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                   PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      922,128
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      5,913
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          34,215
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        24,301
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 988,591
<COMMON>                                       191,810
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            122,657
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 314,467
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,240
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           302,034
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  137,900
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 230,950
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  988,591
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      457,131
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            15,657
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     370,762
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     386,419
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         70,712
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               1,321
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  72,033
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        40,181
<NET-INCOME>                                    31,852
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        114
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   22,306
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        10,727 
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       36,875
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          67,976
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.68
        


</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 29, 2014

d0721 

# Order

Clerk July 29, 2014

148805

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148805

COA: 319355

Wayne CC: 09

- 024170

- FC

MARK DEWITT YANCEY,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 10, 2014

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 13, 2015

No. 04-15-00558-CR

Jose GONZALEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR8928

Honorable Lorina I. Rummel, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The reporter’s record for this appeal was originally due to be filed on September 31, 

2015. On October 30, 2015, court reporter Kay Gittinger filed the second notice of late record 

seeking another 30-day extension to November 30, 2015. Due to the amount of time already 

allowed, Ms. Gittinger’s request is granted in part. 

It is therefore ORDERED that Kay Gittinger file the reporter’s record in this court no 

later than November 24, 2015. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS OF TIME WILL BE

ALLOWED

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

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

court on this 13th day of November, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
----

**EXHIBIT      32.6**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO § 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY      ACT OF 2002**

|   | (1) | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of § 13(a) or 15(d) of the                Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                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:                November 9, 2006 | By:    | /s/                Thomas G. Sategna          |
|---------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                                  |   | Thomas                G. Sategna              |
|                                  |   | Vice                President,                |
|                                  |   | Controller                and Treasurer       |
|                                  |   | Texas-New                Mexico Power Company |
Fw: track changes version of the footnotes for forwarding to OMB

Lydia Wegman to: Tricia Crabtree 06/02/2010 12:38 PM

----- Forwarded by Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US on 06/02/2010 12:38 PM -----

From: Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US

To: "Laity, James A." <James_A._Laity@omb.eop.gov>

Cc: "Mancini, Dominic J." <Dominic_J._Mancini@omb.eop.gov>, Lydia 

Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Schwab, Margo" <Margo_Schwab@omb.eop.gov>, Lydia 

Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 06/02/2010 12:12 PM

Subject: Fw: track changes version of the footnotes for forwarding to OMB

Sorry, Lydia and I miscommunicated. Here is the track changes version which you should have gotten 

yesterday

Ron Evans

Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group

HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA

Mail Drop C-439-02

919-541-5488

919-541-0839 fax

----- Forwarded by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US on 06/02/2010 12:09 PM -----

From: Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US

To: Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Amy Lamson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken 

Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Bryan 

Hubbell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 06/01/2010 05:05 PM

Subject: track changes version of the footnotes for forwarding to OMB
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

WASHINGTON, O.C. 

SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY 

May 1, 2023

The Honorable Kevin McCarthy 

Speaker 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Mr. Speaker:

I am writing to follow up on my previous letters regarding the debt limit and to provide 

additional information regarding the Treasury Department's ability to continue to finance the 

operations of the federal government. 

In my January 13 letter, I noted that it was unlikely that cash and extraordinary measures would 

be exhausted before early June. After reviewing recent federal tax receipts, our best estimate is 

that we will be unable to continue to satisfy all of the government's obligations by early June, 

and potentially as early as June 1, if Congress does not raise or suspend the debt limit before that 

time. This estimate is based on currently available data, as federal receipts and outlays are 

inherently variable, and the actual date that Treasury exhausts extraordinary measures could be a 

number of weeks later than these estimates. 

It is impossible to predict with certainty the exact date when Treasury will be unable to pay the 

government's bills, and I will continue to update Congress in the coming weeks as more 

information becomes available. Given the current projections, it is imperative that Congress act 

as soon as possible to increase or suspend the debt limit in a way that provides longer-term 

certainty that the government will continue to make its payments. 

Additionally, Treasury is suspending the issuance of State and Local Government Series (SLGS) 

Treasury securities. SLGS are special-purpose Treasury securities issued to states and 

municipalities to help them comply with certain tax rules. When Treasury issues SLGS, they 

count against the debt limit. Treasury will take this action to manage the risks associated with the 

debt limit, but it is not without costs, as it will deprive state and local governments of an 

important tool to manage their finances. 

We have learned from past debt limit impasses that waiting until the last minute to suspend or 

increase the debt limit can cause serious harm to business and consumer confidence, raise shortterm borrowing costs for taxpayers, and negatively impact the credit rating of the United States. 

If Congress fails to increase the debt limit, it would cause severe hardship to American families, 

harm our global leadership position, and raise questions about our ability to defend our national 

security interests.
acbm_ex102.htm

EXHIBIT 10.2 

 

Purchase Contract

 

Party A: ACRO BIOMEDICAL CO., LTD.

 

Address: 2175 Visionary Way, Suite 1160, Fishers, IN 46038, U.S.A.

 

Party B: Aublog Inc.

 

Address: SF., No.2, Ln.7, Baogao Rd., Xindian Dist., New Taipei City, Taiwan, R.O.C.

 


	1.	Whereas Party A purchases Cordycepin (hereinafter referred to as the Product) from Party B, the specifications and price of the Product are specified in the Appendix.
	
 
	
 

	2.	Party A shall purchase 3,500g of the Product, with USD$117 CIF Hong Kong per gram subject to the Purchase Contract. Moreover, Party A shall also purchase 110 kg relevant ingredient, i.e. cordyceps powder, with USD$ 450 CIF Hong Kong per kilogram and a total amount USD$ 459,000; Party A shall pay in installments and Party B must complete the shipment within 15 days after the receipt of payments.
	
 
	
 

	3.	The transaction of the Product shall be subject to confirmation by both parties after the issuing of Proforma Invoice by Party B.
	
 
	
 

	4.	If there is no objection within 15 days after receiving the goods, Party A shall be regarded as the completion of the inspection. If any, the objection shall be based on the report of SGS, American standard inspection corporation. the inspection contents include the safety indexes of heavy metal-free, pesticide-free and microbial contamination-free. The concentration inspection shall be subject to the inspection standard proposed by SGS. In the event of any disputes, the third-party company as a notary agreed upon by both parties shall verify them.



 


	 
	
 1

	

 
	 



 


	5.	Party B shall provide Party A with professional assistance when Party A develops relevant health-care products based on the Product.
	
 
	
 

	6.	With respect to the packaging and storing method of the Product, Party A shall not change the packaging and storing container of the Product provided by Party B and shall comply with the requirements regulated by Party B in terms of storing environment. Any product quality changes arising out of that shall be solely responsible by Party A. The storing methods are specified in the Specifications by Party B.
	
 
	
 

	7.	The parties agree to engage in a lawsuit and mediate in judiciary authorities in Hong Kong; If there is any omission or supplement in the transaction, the meeting memos shall constitute the supplementary documents agreed upon by the parties.
	
 
	
 

	8.	The Contract is in quadruplicate, Party A shall hold one and Party B shall hold one.



 

Party A: ACRO BIOMEDICAL CO., LTD.

 

Signature of Representative:

 

/s/ Pao-Chi Chu

 

Date: Aug. 23, 2017

 

Party B: Aublog Inc.

 

Signature of Representative:

 

/s/ Chien Chung Ting

 

Date: Aug. 23, 2017

 

 


	
 2
#### Ralph J. SELLERS, Jr., Appellant, v. W. W. CULBERTSON, Tax Assessor, and Porter Homer, County Manager, Metropolitan Dade County, Appellees.

No. 69-106.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

July, 15, 1969.

*809Snowden & Willis and Walter E. Mack-oul, Miami, for appellant.

Thomas C. Britton, County Atty., and Joseph D. Komansky, Asst. County Atty., for appellees.

Before PEARSON, C. J., HENDRY, J., and LOPEZ, AQUILINO, Jr., Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Ralph J. Sellers, Jr., appeals from a declaratory judgment which ruled that he was barred from asserting a claim for back salary after his reinstatement as an employee of Dade County. He was reinstated after the county conceded the unconstitutionality of Section 2-51, Code of Metropolitan Dade County, because of the holding in Gardner v. Broderick, 392 U.S. 273, 88 S.Ct. 1913, 20 L.Ed.2d 1082 (1968).

The ruling concerning laches constitutes a finding of fact based upon the evidence. See City of Miami v. Carter, Fla.1958, 105 So.2d 5; Metropolitan Dade County PI. C.E.B. v. State ex rel. Bishop, Fla.App. 1968, 216 So.2d 76. The record before us is insufficient to show error, and the judgment is affirmed upon authority of Renshaw v. State ex rel. Hickland, 149 Fla. 342, 5 So.2d 700 (1942).

Affirmed.
#### Joseph BERTONE, Appellant, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Appellee.

No. 42826.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 30, 1972.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 65 (Monday, April 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 18492]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07854]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

RTCA Federal Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Charter renewal.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
renewal of the RTCA Charter (FAA Order 1110.77V) for two years, 
effective April 1, 2015. The administrator is the sponsor of the 
committee. The FAA and seven other government agencies use RTCA as a 
federal advisory committee. On January 2, 1976, the FAA, the major 
government user of RTCA products, assumed sponsorship on behalf of all 
government agencies. RTCA brings together representatives of the 
government and industry to form special committees and steering 
committees to provide advice and recommendations on key operational and 
technological issues that impact the Next Generation Air Transportation 
System (NextGen) implementation and the Air Traffic Management System. 
The Secretary of Transportation has determined that that information 
and use of committee are necessary in the public interest in connection 
with the performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at (202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Steering Committee and Special Committee 
meetings are open to the public and announced in the Federal Register, 
except as authorized by Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2015.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management Analyst, Program Oversight and Administration, ANG-A15, 
Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-07854 Filed 4-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
#### Claudina BAHAMONDE, Appellant, v. Roberto BAHAMONDE, Appellee.

No. 69-1057.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Jan. 29, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
# Summary

HAF Quarterly Report - Submissions Status - Q3 2022

# Demographics by Type

HAF Q3 2022 Quarterly Report  - Application Data Breakdown

# Assistance by Participant

HAF Q3 2022 Quarterly Report  - Breakdown of Participant Program Assistance to households

# image1.png
Exhibit 10.1


 


January
30, 2018              


 


VIA
EMAIL


Omagine,
Inc.


136
Madison Avenue, 5th Floor


New
York, NY 10016


Attn:
Charles Kuczynski, CEO


Email:
charles.kuczynski@omagine.com


 


Copy
to:


Sichenzia
Ross Ference Kesner LLP

1185 Avenue of Americas, 37th Floor

New York, NY 10036


T:212-930-9700


E:
info@srff.com


 


	Re:	12% Convertible Note issued by Omagine, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(“Company”), to EMA Financial, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“EMA”), on or about September
28, 2017 in the original principal amount of $55,000.00 (“Note”), pursuant to that certain Securities Purchase Agreement
dated as of such date between the Company and EMA (“Purchase Agreement”); initially capitalized terms used herein
and not otherwise defined have the meaning set forth the Note or, Purchase Agreement as the case may be.




 


Dear
Mr. Kuczynski,


 


In
connection with the above referenced Purchase Agreement and Note, we hereby notify you that an Event of Default has occurred and
is continuing under the Note due to, among other things, the Company’s failure to reserve a sufficient number of shares
of Common Stock in accordance with the terms of the Note and Purchase Agreement, the Company’s breach of covenants and breach
of representations and warranties. EMA hereby elects and requires the Company to redeem the Note for cash at the amount specified
in Article III of the Note, which is a minimum of $1,868,312.82 Demand is hereby made that the Company remit such amount to EMA
immediately.


 


Note
that the above-referenced defaults are in addition to any other breaches and defaults by the Company that may exist under the
Note, Purchase Agreement, and/or any other document entered into in connection therewith. Note further that Default Interest has
accrued and continues to accrue under the Note at 24% per annum since the inception of the Event of Default.


 


Please
be advised that this letter shall not in any way waive or prejudice any of the rights of EMA or obligations of the Company under
the Note, Purchase Agreement, or any other document, or under law, in equity or otherwise, and shall not constitute a waiver of
any provision of the Note, Purchase Agreement, or any other document. Without limiting the foregoing, nothing contained herein,
nor the omission to state herein additional breaches, failures or misrepresentations by the Company, shall imply that the Company
is not in breach or default under, or has not made misrepresentations under, any provision of the Note, Purchase Agreement, or
any other document, nor prejudice EMA in any way, and EMA reserves the right to assert any additional and/or further breaches,
defaults and/or misrepresentations under the Note, Purchase Agreement, and other documents and the transactions contemplated thereby
and take any and all actions under law, in equity or otherwise in connection therewith.


 


Sincerely,


EMA
Financial, LLC