alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Preston E. GANN, Appellee.

No. 77-804.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 18, 1977.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and C. Marie King, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellant.

Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, Robert H. Grizzard, II, Asst. Public Defender, and James R. Auchak, Legal Intern, Bartow, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Reversed. *See Fultz v. State,*351 So.2d 414 (Fla.2d DCA 1977); Massey v. *State,*348 So.2d 1244 (Fla.1st DCA 1977).

GRIMES, Acting C. J., and SCHEB and RYDER, JJ., concur.
# #4.2 DOE Statement on Schedule, November 15, 2005 In Section 141 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress directed DOE to submit an initial report regarding each new or revised energy conservation standard that DOE has failed to prescribe in conformance with Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S. C. § 6291 , et seq., as amended) deadlines as well as a plan for expeditiously prescribing such new or revised standard. As part of its preparation for the report, DOE will hold a public meeting on November 15, 2005, to review and discuss scheduling issues regarding all categories of appliances to which Section 141 applies, as well as the rulemakings required by Sections 135 and 136 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. In order to allow sufficient time to consider the comments provided by interested parties at and after the meeting, the Department will release, no later than January 31, 2006, schedules to complete all affected rulemakings. DOE will submit its initial report to Congress by February 8, 2006. 

# #4.2 DOE Statement on Schedule, November 15, 2005 In Section 141 ofthe Energy PolicyAct of2005, Congress directed DOE to submit an initial report regarding each new orrevised energy conservation standard that DOE has failed to prescribe in conformance with Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S. C. 

### § 6291, et seq., as amended) deadlines as well as a plan for expeditiouslyprescribing such new orrevised standard. As part ofits preparation for the report, DOE will hold a public meeting onNovember 15,2005, to review and discuss scheduling issues regarding all categories ofappliances to which Section 141 applies, as well as the rulemakings requiredby Sections 135 and 136 ofthe Energy Policy Act of2005. In order to allow sufficient time to consider the comments providedby interestedparties at and afterthe meeting, the Department will release, no later than January 31, 2006, schedules to complete all affected rulemakings. DOE will submitits initial report to Congress byFebruary 8, 2006.
Exhibit 99.7

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEER**

 

We hereby consent to the use and reference to our name and report evaluating a portion of Cenovus Energy Inc. oil and gas reserves data, including estimates of proved reserves and probable reserves and related future net revenue as at December 31, 2010, estimated using forecast prices and costs, and the information derived from our reports, as described or incorporated by reference in Cenovus Energy Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2010 and Cenovus Energy Inc.’s registration statements on Form S-8 (File No. 333-163397), Form F-3 (File No. 333-166419), and Form F-9 (File No. 333-167876) filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended or the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, as applicable.

 

 
|   | Yours   truly,                               |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|
|   |                                         |
|   | GLJ   PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS LTD.             |
|   |                                         |
|   | /s/   Dana B. Laustsen                       |
|   | Dana   B. Laustsen, P. Eng.                  |
|   | Executive   Vice-President                   |
|   |                                         |
|   |                                         |
|   | Calgary,   Alberta

February 25,   2011 |

 

----
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 17, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-1829

Lower Tribunal No. F16-18148

________________

Sedrick Wright,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from 

the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose L. Fernandez, Judge.

Brownstone, P.A., and Robert L. Sirianni, Jr. (Winter Park), for 

appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY and LOBREE, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000023426
<NAME> THE CONNECTICUT LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
<MULTIPLIER>1,000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                       SEP-30-1995
<BOOK-VALUE>                                          PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                            4,013,002
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                            291,805
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 504,087
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                             1,338,473
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       6,147,367
<COMMON>                                               122,229
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                              637,437
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                    793,477
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                       1,553,143
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  155,000
<PREFERRED>                                            116,200
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                 1,815,232
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                      81,650
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                    0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                               0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                            8,719
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                7,500
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                            108,655
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                        65,776
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                       2,235,492
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                        6,147,367
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                            1,764,733
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                   132,525
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                           1,379,094
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                           1,517,776
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                                246,957
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                       8,074
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                         261,188
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                96,760
<NET-INCOME>                                           164,428
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             17,379
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                          147,049
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                               119,296
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                                    0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                                 398,553
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                             0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0.00
        




</TABLE>
Exhibit 13.1







PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with this Annual Report of Scorpio Tankers Inc. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Emanuele Lauro, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 results of operations of the Company.





A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.





Date: June 29, 2010








/s/ Emanuele Lauro


Emanuele Lauro


Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
Exhibit 32.3.2

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

I,
Edward J. Rasmussen, the Chief Financial Officer of Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. (the "Company") certify that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2003, 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/EDWARD J. RASMUSSENEdward J. Rasmussen
|----------------------- | -----------------------------------------
|Dated: November 7, 2003 |                                          

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

QuickLinks
N2O Emissions (a) CH4

 Emissions (a) CO2e Emissions (b)

Emission Emission Emission

Heat Input Operation Annual Heat Input Factor Annual Emissions Factor Annual Emissions Factor Annual Emissions Emission Rate

Unit (MMBtu/hr) (Hr/yr) (MMBtu/yr) (lb/MMBtu) (Short tons/yr) (lb/MMBtu) (Short tons/yr) (lb/MMBtu) (Short tons/yr) (Short tons/yr)

Emergency Generator 21.01 500 10,505 163.0 856 1.32E-03 6.95E-03 6.6E-03 3.47E-02 859

Fuel Gas Heater 10 6780 67,800 116.9 3961 2.20E-04 7.47E-03 2.2E-03 7.47E-02 3965

(a) Table C-2, Subpart C, 40 CFR Part 98. Emission factors in kg/MMBtu were converted to lb/MMBtu by multiplying by 2.204.

(b ) CO2e = CO2 + (21 x CH4) + (310 x N2O)

Source: Golder, 2012; Revision 6/26/13, Emergency Generator rating = 2,500 kW.

TABLE 4. Shady Hills Expansion: GHG Emissions for the Proposed Emergency Generator and Fuel Gas Heater

CO2 Emissions (a)
04/15/2014 09:46 FAX 3107256816 AWP-7 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: 

Ridan Investments, Inc., 

Respondent. 

) FAA Docket No. [TBA] 

) FDMS No. FAA-2013-1082 

) FAA Case No. 2012S0700133 

) 

) Judge: Richard C. Goodwin 

) 

) Region: Western-Pacific 

) 

) 

) AMENDED NOTICE OF 

) APPEARANCE 

) 

Pursuant to section 13.33 of the ~ules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions, 

the, Federal Aviation Administration, hereby amends its original Notice of Appearance 

and designates the following Attorney as cmmsel in the captioned case: 

Courtney Adolph, Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AWP-7.4 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

Phone (310) 725-7128 

Facsimile (310) 725-6816 

Email: Courtney.Adolph@faa,gov 

Respectfully submitted, 

NAOMI TSUDA 

Regional Counsel 

By: ~-------­ Courtney Adolph 

General Attorney 

~ 002/003 
04/15/2014 09:46 FAX 3107256816 AWP-7 

ERRATA SHEET 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The am.ended Notice of Appearance is being issued to correct the FDMS No. 

cited on the caption page. 

I hereby certify that the attached Notice of Appearance in the Matter ofRidan 

Investments, Inc., has been sent to the following parties, via ce1tified mail, ret(IIIl 

receipt requested, or via facsimile where indicated below. 

Hon. Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DB 20590 

Attn: Patricia Matthews 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Via Certified Mail to: 

Lawrence M. Burek (Connsel for the Respondent) 

550 North Parkcenter Drive, Suite 20~-

And to: 

Santa Ana, CA 92705 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn.: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000 

FAX: 202-493·5142 

:} f-ra /_,~/;;t;xzL;p.. Antonia Garcia 

Paralegal, Entbrcement 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Lawndale, California 90261 

Dated: Aprill5, 2014 

2 

141003/003 
04/15/2014 09:46 FAX 3107256816 AWP-7 

Hon. Richard C_ Goodwin 

To: Attn: Patricka Matthews 

Company: Office of Hearings, M-20, US DOT 

Phone: 

Fax: (202) 366-7536 

From: Courtney Adolph 

Title: Attorney 

Date: 4/14/15 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AWP7.4 

PO Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

Telephone: (310) 725-7128 

Facsimile: (310) 725-6816 

Email: Courtney.Adolph@taa.gov 

Facsimile 

Amended Notice of Apperance Total Number of pages including the 

Description of 

1tem being 

transmitted: 

In the Matter of Rid an cover page: 3 

Investments, Inc., FDMS No. 

FAA-2013-1082 

FAA Case No. 201250700133 

FAA Docket No. TBD 

D PER YOUR REQUEST D FOR YOUR REVIEW D PLEASE COMMENT 

D FOR COORDINATION D HARD COPY TO FOLLOW VIA US MAIL 

NOTES/COMMENTS: 

cc: Hearing Docket Cler.k, A GC-430 (Hat:d copy to follow in the U.S. mail) 

(202) 493-5142 

Lawrence Burek H:at:d copy sent in the U.S. mail 

141001/003 

0 U.S. Department ofTransportJIIon
#### Donald Lee THOMAS v. PEPSI-COLA GENERAL BOTTLERS, INC.

No. 62674.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 1, 1978.

In re: Pepsi-Cola General Bottlers, Inc., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to *581the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 359 So.2d 283.

Writ denied.
#### Thomas WILSON, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1133.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 13, 1977.

Thomas Wilson, Jr., in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and KEHOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of this appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
CORONAVIRUS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Allocations Methodology for States, Territories, and Freely Associated States

August 2021

The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 established the Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund (the 

Fund), which provides $10 billion in payments to States, territories, and Tribal governments to 

carry out critical capital projects directly enabling work, education, and health monitoring, 

including remote options, in response to the public health emergency with respect to the 

Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).1

Under the statute, the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico (the States) are eligible 

to receive total payments of $9.8 billion, and the seven territories and freely associated states, as 

one group, and Tribal governments and the State of Hawaii (for Native Hawaiian programs), as 

another group, are each eligible to receive payments totaling $100 million. 

This document describes Treasury’s methodology for allocating the funds to States, as well as 

territories and freely associated states. 

Allocation methodology 

State allocations 

Each of the 52 States (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) is entitled to a fixed 

amount of $100 million per state, totaling $5.2 billion. States are also entitled to a portion of the 

remaining $4.6 billion, allocated as follows: 

• 50 percent ($2.3 billion) allocated among the States based on the proportion that the 

population of each State bears to the population of all States; 

• 25 percent ($1.15 billion) allocated among the States based on the proportion that the 

number of individuals living in rural areas in each State bears to the number of 

individuals living in rural areas in all States; and 

• 25 percent ($1.15 billion) allocated among the States based on the proportion that the 

number of individuals with a household income below 150 percent of the poverty line 

applicable to a family of the size involved in each State bears to the number of such 

individuals in all States. 

To implement this provision, Treasury used the resident population counts from the 2020 

decennial Census apportionment data to determine each State’s population, and the 2019 

one-year estimates from the American Community Survey for the number of people living in 

1 Section 604 of the Social Security Act, as added by section 9901 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Pub. 

L. No. 117-2 (Mar. 11, 2021).
rural areas and the number of individuals with household incomes below 150 percent of the 

poverty line. 

Territory and Freely Associated State allocations 

The Fund provides $100 million to be paid in equal shares to the seven territories and freely 

associated states specified in the statute. These entities are the United States Virgin Islands, 

Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of 

the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau. Each of the 

named territories and freely associated states will be allocated $14,285,714.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement

, 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.

November 21, 2018

a1114 

# Order

Clerk November 21, 2018

156782

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 156782

COA: 332491

Wayne CC: 01

- 003031

- FC

JUAN T. WALKER,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 12, 2017

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MC R 7.305(H)(1), in

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE that part of the judgment of the Court of

Appeals holding that the trial court clearly erred in finding a reasonable probability that

the defendant would have accepted the plea offer, and we RE MAND this case to that

court for consideration of whether Lafler v Cooper , 566 US 156 (2012), should be

applied retroactively to this case, in which the defendant’s convictions became final in

2005.

T he Court of Appeals found clear error in the trial cou rt’s memorandum opinion

and in its statements during oral argument at a subsequent hearing. However, in its

review of the record, the Court of Appeals failed to recognize that, at the end of that

hearing, the trial court quoted the applicable standard fro m Lafler and unequivocally

found that there was a reasonable probability that the defendant would have accepted the

plea offer. This finding

– made by the trial judge who presided over the trial and the

evidentiary hearing

– is supported by the record, an d we are not “left with a definite and

firm conviction that the trial court made a mistake.” People v Armstrong , 490 Mich 281,

289 (2011).
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 provided the U.S. Department of the Treasury $9 

billion for the Emergency Capital Investment Program (ECIP) to provide direct investments into 

Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) and Minority Depository Institution (MDI) 

banks, credit unions and holding companies. These investments are designed to support the 

efforts of community financial institutions to, among other things, provide loans, grants, and 

forbearance for small and minority-owned businesses and consumers, especially in low-income 

and financially underserved communities that struggled the most during the COVID-19 crisis.

These mission-driven financial institutions specialize in delivering responsible capital, credit and 

financial services to underserved communities. The investments made by Treasury are expected 

to be used for a range of community investments, including loans to low-income and minority 

borrowers and underserved small business, the development and preservation of affordable 

housing, and investments in community development projects.

Emergency Capital Investment Program Fact Sheet

Kentucky

Treasury has awarded institutions headquartered within 

Kentucky over $122 million in ECIP investment funds. 

Institution Headquarters City Type Award Amount 

Park Federal Credit Union Louisville CDFI $ 122,500,000 

Note: Headquarters City indicates institution headquarters location only. Institution's lending activity may go beyond 

identified city.

For More Information: 

For Media Inquiries: 

For General Inquiries:

Please visit https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/cares/emergency-capital-investment-program

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

Please email ecip@treasury.gov for additional information
#### Lucille M. HOWE, Appellant, v. Howard F. HOWE, Appellee.

No. 73-49.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 9, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the accompanying Report on Form 10-Q ofComputer Horizons Corp. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period endedSeptember 30, 2005 (the “Periodic Report”), I, Michael J. Shea, Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, hereby certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant toRule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) under the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18U.S.C. Section 1350), that:

 

1.     thePeriodic Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period endedSeptember 30, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. Section 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

2.     theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  | November 8, 2005 | /s/  Michael J. Shea                            |
|--------|------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|   |             | MICHAEL J. SHEA                                      |
|   |             | Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer |

 

 

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-K pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except tothe extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes ofSection 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “ExchangeAct”).  Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated byreference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or theExchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporatesit by reference.

 

----