alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 230 (Monday, December 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 63515]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31336]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration


Designation for the State of Mississippi

AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration 
(GIPSA), USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: GIPSA announces the designation of the Mississippi Department 
of Agriculture and Commerce (Mississippi) to provide official services 
under the United States Grain Standards Act, as amended (Act).

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1998.

ADDRESSES: USDA, GIPSA, Janet M. Hart, Chief, Review Branch, Compliance 
Division, STOP 3604, Room 1647-S, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., 
Washington, DC 20250-3604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janet M. Hart, telephone 202-720-8525.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This action has been reviewed and determined 
not to be a rule or regulation as defined in Executive Order 12866 and 
Departmental Regulation 1512-1; therefore, the Executive Order and 
Departmental Regulation do not apply to this action.
    In the June 30, 1997, Federal Register (62 FR 35147), GIPSA asked 
persons interested in providing official services in the geographic 
area assigned to Mississippi to submit an application for designation. 
Applications were due by July 30, 1997. Mississippi, the only applicant 
for the Mississippi area, applied for designation to provide official 
services in the entire area currently assigned to them.
    Since Mississippi was the only applicant for the Mississippi area, 
GIPSA did not ask for comments on the applicants.
    GIPSA evaluated all available information regarding the designation 
criteria in Section 7(f)(1)(A) of the Act and, according to Section 
7(f)(1)(B), determined that Mississippi is able to provide official 
services in the geographic area for which they applied. Effective 
January 1, 1998, and ending December 31, 2000, Mississippi is 
designated to provide official services in the geographic area 
specified in the June 30, 1997, Federal Register.
    Interested persons may obtain official services by contacting 
Mississippi at 601-947-4095.

    Authority: Pub. L. 94-582, 90 Stat. 2867, as amended (7 U.S.C. 
71 et seq.).

    Dated: November 21, 1997.
Neil E. Porter,
Director, Compliance Division.
[FR Doc. 97-31336 Filed 11-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-EN-P
#### Larry TYLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-506.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 9, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
### NUMBER 13 - 11 - 00 781 - CR 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

EX PARTE JOSE MANUEL MAGANA SURIA

___________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the 13 9th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant was convicted of the first

- degree felony offense of murder. See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. ' 19.02(c) (Vernon 2003). On November 1 0 , 20 11 , the trial court entered an order denying appellant = s req uest for the appointment of counsel to file a motion for forensic DNA testing under Chapter 64 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P R O C

. A NN . art. 64.01, et. seq. (West Supp. 2010). Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal regarding this order.2

On December 22, 2011 , the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared
that the order is not appealable and that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was
not corrected with in ten days from the date of receipt of the Court = s directive. Appellant filed a response to this notice , stating that even though the motion is styled as an ex parte matter, the Court has jurisdiction. The denial of a motion for appointment of counsel in a proceeding involving a motion for post

- conviction DNA testing is not immediately appealable, but the issue may be raised on appeal from an order denying a motion for DNA testing. See Gutierrez v. Stat e , 307 S.W.3d 318, 322

- 23 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (“The better course is for a convicted person to file a motion for DNA testing and, if and when the motion is denied, appeal any alleged error made by the trial judge in refusing to appoint counsel. If a

re viewing court determines that the trial judge erred in failing to appoint counsel, then the case will be remanded to the trial court so the convicted person can file a subsequent motion for DNA testing with the assistance of counsel.”). Thus, the order de nying appointed counsel under Chapter 64 is not an appealable order under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(a)(2). See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(a)(2). The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, is of the opinion that the appe al should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(a). PER CURIAM Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.2(b). Delivered and filed the 8th day of March , 201 2

.
## p. ~!'A- 1-~GL-oPPT--~oo~- 003 .3 Jerry Cook To Catherine Roman/DC/USEPA/US@EPA <jcook@cpc-us.com> cc CharlesWillis <c.willis@case-labs.com> 07/24/2006 09:38 AM
Good Morning, Catherine; bcc Subject 84-65-1, under final TSCAtest rule

We have one more testing issue which I hope you can address for us. ASTME324is the method specified for melting point determination in the March 16, 2006final rule under TSCA Section 4. This method is stated by ASTM to be applicable for organic chemicals whose melting points without decomposition fall between 30 and 250°C . The attached pdffile of a page fromthe ASTM

website also states that, "This test method is not directly applicable to opaque materials" . 9,10-Anthracenedione, CAS # 84-65-1, is reported in the open literature as having a melting point of 286 degrees C (Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, CRC) . In addition, this is stated in E324 to be a relative measure of melting point. The method states, "This method determines initial and final melting points by a relative procedure, utilizing a standard sample that has been assigned jointly accepted melting point values by the concerned parties (such as a supplier and a consumer," . We do not possess a standard sample as described in ASTME324 . The laboratory conducting the melting point determination for us says that it is capable of providing a melting point determination for 9,10-Anthracenedione utilizing the Capillary Melting Point Apparatus and Melting Point Capillary Tubes described in ASTM E324. Chemical Products Corporation requests that we be allowed to provide a melting point determined "by the method of ASTM E324" which is not a relative value related to a standard, but it rather an observed absolute melting point value for the 9,10-Anthracenedione test article utilizing the ASTME324test method. Thanks and Best Regards, Jerry
ASTME324-99 Test Method for Relative MP .pdf

~.' . .. 

## CONTAINS NOCBI Melting Point determination for 9,10-Anthracenedione, CAS#

- ~ ~ ~ 1 1 r*n

G7
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2

                             AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE
                                     TO THE
                            COX COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
                            LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN



         Pursuant to the power of Cox Communications, Inc. (the "Company") to
amend the Cox Communications, Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan (the "Plan"), the
Plan hereby is amended as follows:

                                       1.

         Section 4 of the Plan is amended by deleting the first sentence thereof
in its entirety and by substituting the following therefor:

         "Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 10, the total number of
         Shares reserved and available for Awards under the Plan shall be
         24,000,000."

                                       2.

         The effective date of this Amendment Number Three is the date the
Amendment is adopted by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of
the Company; subject, however, to the approval of the Amendment by the
shareholders of the Company at the annual shareholder meeting of the Company to
be held in the year 2000.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT RAY JAMES, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-3979 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed May 1, 2019. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Barbara Twine Thomas, Judge. Ray James, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See §§ 961.02(7), 961.03(1)(b)(1), Fla. Stat. (2018); James v. State, 241 So. 3d 775 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (table decision).

CASANUEVA, SILBERMAN, and ATKINSON,JJ., Concur.
Quarterly Report to Congress on International Monetary Fund Lending

October 1 – December 31, 2011

Board 

Approval Date Country Amount Type U.S. Position Background

11/04/2011 Côte d’Ivoire SDR 390.24 million 

($615.9 million)

ECF Support http://www.imf.org/external/n

p/sec/pr/2011/pr11399.htm

SDR 5.04 million

($8 million)

Additional 

Interim 

Enhanced HIPC 

Assistance 

11/14/2011 Islamic Republic of 

Afghanistan

SDR 85 million 

($133.6 million)

ECF Support http://www.imf.org/external/n

p/sec/pr/2011/pr11412.htm

11/23/2011 Solomon Islands SDR 5.2 million

($ 8.08 million)

SCF Support http://www.imf.org/external/n

p/sec/pr/2011/pr11448.htm

12/12/2011 Mali SDR 30 million 

($46.3 million)

ECF Support http://www.imf.org/external/n

p/sec/pr/2011/pr11487.htm
ALTOONA WATER AUTHORITY 

Wastewater Treatment 

144 Westerly TrealmcntP1antRoad • Duncansville. FA 16635 • phone: 814.949.2218 • fax: 814-949-0979 

W\VW .altoonawater .emu 

Apri16, 2011 

Mr. Ronald C. Furlan, PE 

Manager 

Division Of Planning and Permits 

P A Department of Environmental Protection 

Rachel Carson State Office Building 

PO Box 8774 

Harrisburg, PA 7105-8774 

Re: Permit ID: PA 0027014, Altoona Water Authority 

Dear Mr. Furlan, 

On AprilS, 2011, Mr. Lee McDonnell and Mr. J. Pascal Kwedza from the Southcentral 

Office telephoned to inform me that if the Altoona Water Authority wished to continue 

receiving gas well drilling wastewater our current practice ofland applying biosolids 

would be terminated and the sludge produced would then be required to be placed into 

a landfill for disposal. They also stated that the additional sampling indicated in your 

letter dated March 18, 2011 would become part of the amended permit. 

To continue receiving gas well drilling wastewater, the sludge disposal cost for the 

Altoona Water Authority would be as high as five times the current revenue it creates 

per year. (approximately $80,000) 

With the pending permit amendments and the effluent data requested in your letter the 

Altoona Water Authority will abandon the practice of receiving any gas well 

wastewater for disposal. The Altoona Water Authority requests the monitoring 

requirements described in the March 18, 2011 letter not be enforced since we will no 

longer accept the wastewater. 

The permit issued to Pennsylvania General Energy of Warren, PA and the Hauler 

Licence issued to Dively Trucking of Somerset, P A will be terminated as of April 8, 

2011. The last delivery of this wastewater has been set for 3 :00 PM on the same day. 
Mr. Ronald C. Furlan -2- April6, 2011 

If there are any questions or additional information is required, please call me at 

814-949-2246 ext. 2202 

Resp·e· ctfully, 

-~~----~_.._c«i - Geo-;; C. B'cliski 

d) 

Environmental Services Manger 

cc: J. Pascal Kwedza, DEP 

J olm Lovell, EPA Region III 

Mark Perry, Altoona Water Authority
815 A.2d 378

#### ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND, Petitioner, v. Gary Francis STERN, Respondent.

Misc. AG No. 34,

Sept. Term, 2002.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Jan. 24, 2003.

ORDER

This matter came before the Court on the Joint Petition for Reprimand by Consent submitted by the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, Petitioner, and Gary Francis Stern, Respondent. The Court having considered the Petition, it is this 24th day of January, 2003,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland that the Respondent, Gary Francis Stern, be, and he is hereby, reprimanded for his violation of Rules 1.2(a), 1.7(b) and 1.15 of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct, and Maryland Rule 16-607 by his improper handling of client funds.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IGNACIO GALVAN

- INCLAN,

Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 72447 Agency No. A087

- 991

- 730

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 2 , 2020 * *
Before: WALLACE , CLIFTON , and BRESS, Circuit Judges. Ignacio Galvan

- Inclan , a native and citizen of Mexico , petitions for review of the Board of Immigra tion Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal

. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo the legal question of whether a particular social gro up is cognizable, except to the extent that

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

DEC 8 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 18

- 72447

deference is owed to the BIA’s interpretation of the governing statutes and regulations. Conde Quevedo v. Barr , 947 F.3d 1238, 1241

- 42 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not err in co ncluding that Galvan

- Inclan did not establish membership in a cognizable social group. See Reyes v. Lynch , 842 F.3d 1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular group, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting Matter of M

- E

- V

- G

- , 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014)) ); see also Ramirez

- Munoz v. Lynch , 816 F.3d 1226, 1228

- 29 (9th Cir. 2016) (concluding “imputed wealthy Americans” returning
to Mexico did not constitute a particular social group); Delgado

- Ortiz v. Holder , 600 F.3d 1148, 1151

- 52 (9th Cir. 2010) (concluding “returning Mexicans from the United States” did not constitute a particular social group)

. Thus, Galvan

- Inclan’s withholding of removal claim fail s
. Galvan

- Inclan ’s request to remand for termination of proceedings, set forth in his opening brief, is denied. See Aguilar Fermin v. Barr , 958 F.3d 887, 895 (9th3 18

- 72447

Cir. 2020) (omission of certain information from a notice to appear can be cured for jurisdictional purposes by later hearing notice).
As stated in the court’s September 1 8 , 201 8 order, the temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64906-64907]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32114]


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

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE


Notice of Meeting of the Industry Sector Advisory Committee on 
Capital Goods (ISAC-2)

AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Industry Sector Advisory Committee on Capital Goods (ISAC 
2) will hold a meeting on December 10, 1997 from 9:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. 
The meeting will be open to the public from 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. and 
closed to the public from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

DATES: The meeting is scheduled for December 10, 1997, unless otherwise 
notified.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Department of Commerce in 
Room 1859, located at 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., 
Washington, D.C., unless otherwise notified.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Pilaroscia, Department of 
Commerce, 14th St. and Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230,

[[Page 64907]]

(202) 482-0609 or Bill Daley, Office of the United States Trade 
Representative, 600 17th St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20508, (202) 395-
6120.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ISAC 2 will hold a meeting on December 
10, 1997 from 9:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. The meeting will include a review 
and discussion of current issues which influence U.S. trade policy. 
Pursuant to Section 2155(f)(2) of Title 19 of the United States Code 
and Executive Order 11846 of March 27, 1975, the Office of the U.S. 
Trade Representative has determined that part of this meeting will be 
concerned with matters the disclosure of which would seriously 
compromise the development by the United States Government of trade 
policy, priorities, negotiating objectives or bargaining positions with 
respect to the operation of any trade agreement and other matters 
arising in connection with the development, implementation and 
administration of the trade policy of the United States. During the 
discussion of such matters, the meeting will be closed to the public 
from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. The meeting will be open to the public and 
press from 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. when other trade policy issues will 
be discussed. Attendance during this part of the meeting is for 
observation only. Individuals who are not members of the committee will 
not be invited to comment.
Pate Felts,
Acting Assistant United States Trade Representative, Intergovernmental 
Affairs and Public Liaison.
[FR Doc. 97-32114 Filed 12-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-01-M
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Venture Lending & Leasing VI, Inc. (the "Fund") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Martin D. Eng, Chief Financial Officer of the Fund, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 result of operations of the Fund.





/S/ Martin D. Eng





Martin D. Eng


Chief Financial Officer


March 15, 2017
AAM-13-238-E April 19, 2013

Exemption No. 10302A Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0581

Mr. Dan Steiner

President New Horizons Aviation, Inc.

17229 CR 42 Goshen, IN 46526

Dear Mr. Steiner:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 10302. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the conditions

and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated February 21, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of New Horizon Aviation, Inc. (NHA) for an extension of Exemption No. 10302. That exemption from part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows Air Charter Services, Inc., which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to NHA.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 10302 remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the following conditions and limitations.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of New Horizons Aviation are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol program must be implemented under the auspices of the Aircraft Charter Services, Inc. part 135 operation, not under part 91.

This exemption terminates on July 31, 2015, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/
James R. Fraser, M.D. Deputy Federal Air Surgeon

Enclosure