alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Henry GATES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. N-439.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Feb. 25, 1971.

Rehearing Denied March 31, 1971.

*291Ernest D. Jackson, Sr., Jacksonville, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

This cause having been orally argued before the Court, the briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and the appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the order of the lower court appealed from herein is affirmed.

WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K„ and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 234 (Friday, December 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 64398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31851]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[CO-010-07-1020-00-241A]


Northwest Colorado Resource Advisory Council Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The next meeting of the Northwest Colorado Resource Advisory 
Council will be held on Friday, January 9, 1998, in Glenwood Springs, 
Colorado.

DATE: Friday, January 9, 1998.

ADDRESSES: For further information, contact Joann Graham, Bureau of 
Land Management (BLM), Grand Junction District Office, 2815 H Road, 
Grand Junction, Colorado 81506; telephone (970) 244-3037.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will be held at the Garfield 
County Courthouse, 109 8th Street, Room 301, Glenwood Springs, 
Colorado. Agenda items include subcommittee reports and status of the 
roadless inventory review.
    All resource advisory council meetings are open to the public. 
Interested persons may make oral statements at the meetings or submit 
written statements following the meetings. Per-person time limits for 
oral statements may be set to allow all interested persons an 
opportunity to speak.
    Summary minutes of council meetings are maintained in both the 
Grand Junction and Craig District Offices. They are available for 
public inspection and reproduction during regular business hours within 
thirty (30) days following the meeting.

    Dated: November 24, 1997.
Mark T. Morse,
District Manager, Craig and Grand Junction Districts.
[FR Doc. 97-31851 Filed 12-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-M
Webinar Attendees: Energy Efficiency Standards for Distribution Transformers; Notice of Intent To Negotiate Proposed RuleMeeting Date: Thursday, September 15, 2011Name Title Organization Street CityStateZip Phone Fax EmailCarmichael, Robert Consultant Navigant Consulting, Inc. 1801 K Street NW, Suite500Washington DC 20006-1301 202-481-7393 202-973-2401 robert.carmichael@navigantconsulting.comCorel, Dale Sr. Design Engineer NEMA 9377 W. Higgins Rd. Rosemont IL 60018 N/A N/A dale.corel@emerson.comDrexler, P.E., Charles R VP of Operations /EngineeringKentucky Association of ElectricCooperatives4515 Bishop Lane Louisville KY 40218 502-451-2430 N/A charlied@uus.orgcdrexler@kaec.orgFlaten, David Senior Specialty Engineer Xcel Energy 1123 West 3rd Ave Denver CO 80223 N/A N/A david.l.flaten@xcelenergy.comHofmann, Alex Engineering ServicesSpecialistAmerican Public Power Association(APPA)1875 Connecticut AvenueNWSuite 1200Washington DC 20009-5715 202-467-2989 202-495-7489 ahofmann@APPAnet.orgHopkinson, Philip J. President and ChiefExecutive Officer P.E.HVolt Inc. 3704 High Ridge Road Charlotte NC 28270 704-846-3290 704-845-2520 PHopkinson@hvolt.comInfante, Ed Principal Engineer Florida Power and Light 5110 NW 159th Street Miami FL 33014 N/A N/A ed.infante@fpl.comKaja, Brian Core and Coil DesignEngineerGE Energy Distribution Transformers 7000 West Bert KounsIndustrial LoopShreverport LA 71129 N/A N/A brian.kaja@ge.comLass, James GM of DistributionEngineering andEmergency ManagementCleco Power LLC 2030 Donahue Ferry Rd Pineville LA 71361 N/A N/A James.Lass@cleco.comLongstreth, Benjamin Attorney Natural Resources Defence Council(NRDC)1152 15th Street, NWSuite 300Washington DC 20005 202-513-6256 202-289-1060 blongstreth@nrdc.orgMeyers, Aaron Program Manager Cooper Power Systems 1900 E. North Street Waukesha WI 53188 262-524-4347 N/A Aaron.Meyers@CooperIndustries.comPetrosino, Thomas Consultant Prolec GE / TRP Consulting 1917 Park Road Charlotte NC 28203 704-904-5509 N/A tpetrosino@carolina.rr.comRossetti, John Systems Engineer Memphis Light Gas and Water 220 South Main Memphis TN 38103 N/A N/A jrossetti@mlgw.orgSmith, Robert Product Manager Federal Pacific 601 Old Airport Rd Bristol VA 24201 276-645-8836 N/A bsmith@federalpacific.comYoung, Daniel Project Manager Energy Solutions 1610 Harrison Street Oakland CA 94612 510-482-4420x 246510-482-4421 dyoung@energy-solution.com
Vacate and Remand and Opinion Filed January 18, 2018 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-17-01070-CV 

IN THE INTEREST OF J.M.F., J.V.F., J.A.F., AND J.D.F., CHILDREN 

On Appeal from the 397th Judicial District Court 

Grayson County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. FA-17-0225 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Francis, Evans, and Boatright 

Opinion by Justice Francis 

Before the Court is the letter signed on January 5, 2018 by the parties’ attorneys, asking 

the Court to remand this case back to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with their 

agreement. The parties informed the Court that they have resolved the case and incorporated the 

terms of their settlement agreement into their Amended Final Decree of Divorce. We construe 

the letter as a joint motion to dismiss the appeal. 

In accordance with the parties’ agreement, we grant the motion, vacate the trial court’s 

judgment without regard to the merits, and remand the case back to the trial court for rendition of 

judgment in accordance with the agreement. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). 

171070F.P05 

 

/Molly Francis/ 

MOLLY FRANCIS 

JUSTICE 
 –2– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

IN THE INTEREST OF J.M.F., J.V.F., 

J.A.F., AND J.D.F., CHILDREN 

No. 05-17-01070-CV 

 On Appeal from the 397th Judicial District 

Court, Grayson County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. FA-17-0225. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Francis, 

Justices Evans and Boatright participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we VACATE the trial court’s 

judgment without regard to the merits and REMAND the case back to the trial court for 

rendition of judgment in accordance with the parties’ agreement. 

 Subject to any agreement between the parties, it is ORDERED that appellee Justin Lee 

Falcicchio recover his costs of this appeal from appellant Jenny Kay Falcicchio. 

Judgment entered January 18, 2018.
Jaguar Cars Limited EMISSION DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT No. J09014D1A Causal part name: SENSOR-OXYGEN Causal part number: C2S38497

Issued: 09 January 2010 Page 1 of 2 Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40. Part 85. Subpart T. §85.1903 - Emissions Defect Information Report (c)(1) The manufacturers corporate name. Jaguar Cars Limited. (c)(2) A description of the defect. Drivers of X-type vehicles are prompted to return the vehicle to a Jaguar dealer for service by a check engine light, the dealer finds a defectiv e oxygen sensor and replaces it. Engineering analysis revealed that oxygen sensors were damaged by moisture contamination during June, July and part of August 2007 production months. The damaged stock was cleared to ensure affected vehicles are repaired with robust parts. (c)(3) A description of each class or category of vehicles potentially affected by the defect including make, model, model year, and such other information as may be required to identify these vehicles. See table in section (c)(4)(i) below. (c)(4) For each class or category of vehicle or engine desc ribed in response to paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the following shall also be provided: (c)(4)(i) The number of vehicles or engines known or estimated to have the defectand an explanation of the means by which this number was determined.

MODEL YEAR TEST GROUP MODEL SALES DEFECTS 2008 8JCXV03.0DNH X-TYPE 3.0; SPORTWAGON 807 61 The above data was taken from Jaguar's warranty tracking report dated 2009 Q3. (c)(4)(ii) The address of the plant at which the potentially defective vehicles or engines were produced. Jaguar Halewood Plant, Liverpool, England. (c)(5) An evaluation of the emissions impact of the defect and a description of any driveability problems which a defective vehicle might exhibit. There is no adverse impact on emissions associated with this issue. The function of this oxygen sensor does not directly affect tailpipe emissions. There is no adverse impact on driveability associated with this issue. This defect illuminates the M.I.L. 

## EPA 3976 Received 2/10/2010Jaguar Cars Limited EMISSION DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT No. J09014D1A Causal part name: SENSOR-OXYGEN Causal part number: C2S38497

Issued: 09 January 2010 Page 2 of 2 (c)(6) Available emissions data which relate to the defect. There is no data available quantifying the impact on emissions of this defect. (c)(7) An indication of any an ticipated manufacturer follow-up. Oxygen sensor stock damaged by moisture contamination during June, July and August 2007 was cleared to ensure affected vehicles are re paired with robust parts. This issue is regarded as self campaigning, MIL illumination plus uneven engine running will prompt drivers to return the vehicle to a Jaguar dealer for rectification. 

## EPA 3976 Received 2/10/2010
<Page>
                                                          EXHIBIT 99.1.1


   Certification Required Under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


I, Eugene R. McGrath, the Chief Executive Officer of Consolidated Edison, Inc.
(the "Company") certify that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2002, which this statement accompanies,
(the "Form 10-Q") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the
information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                    /s/ Eugene R. McGrath
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Eugene R. McGrath

Dated:     November 13, 2002
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 21, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-10312 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus YOUA LOR YANG, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:02-CR-198-ALL-A

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Youa Lor Yang (“Yang”) appeals his guilty-plea conviction for importing opium into the United States. For the first time on appeal, Yang argues that his counsel was ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress, not arguing in support of his motion for downward departure at sentencing, and not arguing that the Government should have filed a motion for downward departure based upon his substantial assistance.No. 03-10312 -2- Because Yang did not raise his claims in the district court, there is no evidentiary record on these issues. Consequently, the record has not been developed sufficiently for us to consider Yang’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct appeal.
See United States v. Maria-Martinez , 143 F.3d 914, 916 (5th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED without prejudice to Yang’s right to raise his ineffective assistance of counsel claims in a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We express no view on the merits of such a motion.
#### FLORIDA GAME AND FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION, an agency of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida ex rel. E. E. Bogue BAILEY, Appellee.

No. 71-554.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 17, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
-82 -81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

 37

 38

 39

 40

 41

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

09/04

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 04 Sep 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.50 N 76.81 W Meters AGL
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

May 25, 2010 

0517 

Order 

 

May 25, 2010 

140699 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140699 

 COA: 289562 

Wayne CC: 08-011367-FC 

PIERRE MARTIN MURPHY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 21, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
| 1.     | Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2011, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2011, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Elite Energies, Inc. |

|                           | ELITE ENERGIES, INC. |                    |
|--------------------------------|----------------------|-------------------------|
|                           |                 |                    |   |
| Date:  June 29, 2011 | By:                  | /s/ Spencer Luo         |   |
|                           |                 | Spencer Luo             |   |
|                           |                 | Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                           |                 |                    |   |
#### Gunnar GRIFFIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-848.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 9, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
8/4/2015 Request for Information ­ FAA­2015­1827

https://email.dot.gov/owa/9­AWA­AVS­333Exemptions@faa.gov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAABFvqQJAFf5SI8crGhIsEIyBwD3qfMUO7BCQ74YBi9P12... 1/1

Request for Information ­ FAA­2015­1827

9­AWA­AVS­333Exemptions (FAA)

Sent:Tuesday, August 04, 2015 8:35 AM

To: randy@kcsiaerialpatrol.com

Dear Mr. Cox:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No.

FAA−2015−1827). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to

process your petition.

Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is

required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to proceed without

this manual and remove closed‐set filming from your proposed operation please inform of us of

your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non‐proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and

submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via email to

333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the

information described above by 8/18/15. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket

without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267­9677.

Sincerely,

Dan Ngo

FAA Office of Rulemaking
Treasury approves Maryland’s plan to invest $24.2 million of CPF funding 

in broadband infrastructure projects that will provide high-quality internet 

to locations that lack access to adequate service.

Capital Projects Fund Award Fact Sheet

Maryland

 

▪ Program Summary: $24.2 million for Broadband Infrastructure (14% of CPF allocation)

▪ Locations to Be Served: 4800 (estimated)

▪ Program Description: The Broadband for Difficult to Serve 

Premises Program is a new competitive grant program 

designed to bring high-speed internet access to locations 

that have difficulty obtaining service based on geographic 

barriers by connecting such difficult to serve premises to an 

existing broadband network.

‒ This program is designed to provide internet service with speeds of 100/100 Mbps upon project 

completion.

‒ Internet service providers utilizing investments funded by CPF will be required to participate in 

the FCC’s Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) – a $30 per month subsidy for low-income 

families. 

▪ Key State Contact: The Maryland Office of Statewide Broadband (OSB)

Maryland Capital Projects Fund Program Overview

As reported by Maryland, 

estimates show that 

investments made using the 

Capital Projects Fund will 

serve ~6% of locations still 

lacking high-speed internet 

access in the state.

For More Information: 

For Media Inquiries: 

For General Inquiries:

Please visit www.treasury.gov/CPF

Please contact the U.S. Treasury Press Office at (202) 622-2960

Please email CapitalProjectsFund@treasury.gov for additional information
**Exhibit15.1**

** **

CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form 20-F (Registration Nos. 333-164940) of ScorpioTankers Inc. of our report dated March 23, 2012 relating to the consolidated financial statements and effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting of Scorpio Tankers Inc, which appear in this Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December31, 2011.

 

 

/s/Deloitte LLP

London,United Kingdom

Date:March 23, 2012
January
30, 2018


 


Brands
International Corporation


Attn:
Mark Rubinoff, CEO


Via
email 


 


RE:
Amend the 12-26-17 Letter of Intent Termination Date to March 20, 2018


 


Dear
Mr. Rubinoff:


 


Novo
Integrated Sciences, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“NIS”) and Brands International Corporation are parties to the Letter
of Intent, dated 12-26-17, as attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “LOI”).


 


The
purpose of this letter is to amend the LOI to extend the termination date therein. As we have discussed, the “Termination
Date” for all purposes under the LOI is hereby amended to be March 20, 2018. The LOI, as amended herein, shall remain in
full force and effect.


 


We
continue to look forward to working with you to complete the transaction successfully and expeditiously. If the foregoing correctly
sets forth your understanding, please execute a copy of this Letter in the space set forth below and return to me.


 


	 	Sincerely,
    
	 	 	 
	 	Novo
    Integrated Sciences, Inc.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/
    Christopher David 
	 	Name:	Christopher
    David
	 	Title:	President
	 	 	 
	 	Agreed
    and accepted:
	 	 	 
	 	Brands
    International Corporation
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/
    Mark Rubinoff 
	 	Name:	Mark
    Rubinoff
	 	Title:	Chief
    Executive Officer


 


11120
NE 2nd Street, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98004 USA


Phone:
(206) 617-9797


www.novointegrated.com





 




    	 	 	 



    	P a g e | 2



    

 


Exhibit
‘A’


 





Letter
of Intent


 





(Attached)


 


LOI
filed in 8-K (dated 1-2-18)
FILED 

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

 JUNE 23, 2005 

 THOMAS K. KAHN 

 CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 04-16338

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 04-00141-CR-ORL-28JGG

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

JAMES ROCKET,

a.k.a. James Rockett, 

a.k.a. James Rockett, III,

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(June 23, 2005)

Before BIRCH, BARKETT and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

James Rocket appeals his 72-month sentence imposed pursuant to his plea of

guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). 
2

On appeal, Rocket argues that the district court committed reversible error under

Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. ___, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), and United States v.

Booker, 543 U.S. ___, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), by sentencing him under a mandatory

Guidelines system.

Because Rocket preserved his Booker claim by raising it at sentencing, we

review the challenge to his sentence de novo, but will vacate and remand only for

harmful error. United States v. Paz, 405 F.3d 946, 948 (11th Cir. 2005). “A nonconstitutional error is harmless if, viewing the proceedings in their entirety, a court

determines that the error did not affect the sentence, or had but very slight effect. 

If one can say with fair assurance . . . that the sentence was not substantially

swayed by the error, the sentence is due to be affirmed even though there was

error.” United States v. Mathenia, __ F.3d __ (11th Cir. May 23, 2005)

(quotations, brackets, and citations omitted). Under harmless error review, the

government bears the burden of showing that the error was harmless. Id.

We have explained that there are two types of Booker error – (1) the error of

imposing a sentencing enhancement based on judicial findings that go beyond the

facts admitted by the defendant or found by the jury, or “constitutional error,” and

(2) the non-constitutional error of being sentenced under a mandatory guidelines

system, or “statutory error.” United States v. Shelton, 400 F.3d 1325, 1330-31
3

(11th Cir. 2005). Because Rocket alleges only statutory error, we confine our

discussion to that argument.

Due to the nature of the Supreme Court’s Booker remedy, we have

concluded that a district court errs whenever it sentences a defendant under a

mandatory guidelines scheme. Shelton, 400 F.3d at 1330-31. Furthermore, the

government has failed to meet its burden of proving that the error of sentencing

Rocket under a mandatory guidelines scheme did not affect his substantial rights. 

Therefore, the district court’s error was not harmless.

Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we vacate and remand for

resentencing consistent with Blakely and Booker.

VACATED and REMANDED.