alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 28 (Tuesday, February 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 6293]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3281]


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


SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

First Interstate Equity Corporation (License No. 09/09-0397); 
Notice of Surrender of License

    Notice is hereby given that First Interstate Equity Corporation 
(First Interstate), 100 West Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 58003, 
has surrendered their license to operate as a small business investment 
company under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended 
(the Act). First Interstate was licensed by the Small Business 
Administration on February 1, 1989.
    Under the authority vested by the Act and pursuant to the 
Regulations promulgated thereunder, the surrender was accepted on this 
date, and accordingly, all rights, privileges, and franchises derived 
therefrom have been terminated.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 59.11, Small 
Business Investment Companies.)

    Dated: January 28, 1997.
Donald A. Christensen,
Associate Administrator for Investment.
[FR Doc. 97-3281 Filed 2-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 239 (Friday, December 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 65422]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32503]



[[Page 65422]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-146-007]


U-T Offshore System; Notice of Compliance Filing

December 8, 1997.
    Take notice that on December 3, 1997, U-T Offshore System (U-TOS) 
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised 
Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet to be effective November 1, 
1997:

2nd Sub Second Revised Sheet No. 73A

    U-TOS asserts that the purpose of this filing is to comply with the 
Commission's November 25, 1997, letter order in the captioned 
proceeding regarding the effective version for all Electronic Delivery 
Mechanism standards (4.X.X). The above mentioned letter order indicated 
that Sheet No. 73A as filed on November 3, 1997 incorrectly reflected 
Version 1.1 as the effective version for Standard 4.3.1. The correct 
version is Version 1.0 as listed on the above mentioned revised tariff 
sheet.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. All such motions or 
protests should be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the 
Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of this filing 
are on file and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-32503 Filed 12-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit
23.1





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We consent
to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-89145,
333-30578, 333-14037, 333-71442, 333-49806, 333-67825, 333-35527, 333-104129,
333-110422, 333-120183, 33-82894, 333-130675, and 333-136974 on Form S-8; No.
333-66934 on Form S-4; and Nos. 333-141393 and 333-112493 on Form S-3 of BE
Aerospace, Inc. of our reports dated February 15, 2008, relating to the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of BE
Aerospace, Inc. (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an
explanatory paragraph relating to the Company’s adoption of Financial Accounting
Standards Board Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes) in 2007 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of BE Aerospace, Inc.
for the year ended December 31, 2007.





/s/
Deloitte & Touche LLP


Costa
Mesa, California


February
15, 2008
SERVED: JUNE 11,2014 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS ..t i

WASHINGTON, DC IN THE MATTER OF CHRISTINE CLOUD DOCKET NO. FAA-2014-0321 (Civil Penalty Action)
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2013NM730043) has been assigned to Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service List.

_...

### ../ .........

### --:~:~--······-·"'''"_. .,.....

### - 

## (_____

# -
......,.__ Attachment
- Service ListSERVICE LIST -BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY · 

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independen;ce Avenue, S.W. Washington, D<P 20591 Attention: E:Iearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 1



### Christine Cloud, Respondent 

### 12661 Tanada Circle, Apt. 2 Anchorage,

# AK 99515 Glenn H. Brown, Complainant's Counsel 

### Senior

### Attomer . Office ofthe Regwnal Counsel Federal Aviati(l)n Administration 222 West 7th Avenue 

### # 14 Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 ONE COPY



### The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

### Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 Docket No. FAA-2014-0321 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 2
#### The LOWELL DUNN COMPANY, a Florida corporation, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Velia GOMEZ, a widow, Individually, and Velia Gomez, as Administratrix of the Estate of Luis Bonivacio Gomez, Deceased, Respondent.

No. 69-1113.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 8, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari denied.
CRYSTAL RENEE JOLESCH, n/k/a 

Crystal Renee McBride,

 Appellant,

v.

ANDREW LAWRENCE 

BUSCHBACH, STATE OF FLORIDA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT,

 Appellees.

_______________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED.

CASE NO. 1D14-5842

Opinion filed October 15, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Department of Revenue Child Support 

Enforcement Program.

David A. Carroll, Pensacola, for Appellant.

Sherry Anita Toothman, Assistant General Counsel, Department of Revenue, 

Tallahassee; Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Toni C. Bernstein, Senior 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the appellee’s concession of error, the final 

administrative support order on appeal in this case is VACATED, and this cause is 
2

hereby REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with the concession of 

error.

BENTON, OSTERHAUS, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.
#### Eugene VAUGHN v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 47207.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 26, 1973.

Billy W. Shelton, Tupelo, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by T. E. Childs, Jr., Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Before GILLESPIE, C. J., and PATTERSON, SMITH, SUGG and BROOM, JJ-

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 28 (Tuesday, February 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6232-6233]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3297]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP97-245-000]


Colorado Interstate Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

February 5, 1997.
    Take notice that on January 31, 1997, Colorado Interstate Gas 
Company (CIG), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
First Revised Volume No. 1, Third Revised Sheet No. 368.
    CIG states that Sheet No. 368 was a tariff sheet authorized by 
Commission Order issued December 27, 1991 in Docket No. RP92-44-000. 
The tariff sheet identified customers' buyout-buydown obligation 
pursuant to Order No. 528.
    CIG states the filing is being made to ``clean up'' Sheet No. 368. 
One Buyer had elected to amortize its payment of its obligation over a 
60-month period. The 60-month payment period has terminated and the 
Buyer has paid its obligation; therefore, the filing reflects all 
Buyers have now paid their obligation pursuant to the authorization in 
Docket No. RP92-44-000.
    CIG states that copies of the filing have been sent to all parties 
in Docket No. RP92-44-000. An effective date of March 3, 1997 has been 
requested.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with 
reference to said application should file a motion to intervene or a 
protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,

[[Page 6233]]

in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211). All such motions or 
protest must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the 
Commission's Regulations. Protests filed will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make the protestants parties to the proceedings. Any 
person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. 
Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available 
for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-3297 Filed 2-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
EXHIBIT 13.2

Certification by the Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of AutoNavi Holdings Limited (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Catherine Qin Zhang, Chief Financial 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 to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 25, 2012



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Catherine Qin Zhang

|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|Name:  |  | Catherine Qin Zhang    
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2009-3182 ROBERT SOUTHERLAND,

Petitioner,

v. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,

Respondent. Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in

SF0752080706-I-1. ON MOTION Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, LOURIE and BRYSON Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.
ORDER The court treats Robert Southerland's letter concerning his petition for review as a motion for reconsideration of the court's previous rejection of his petition for review as untimely. On December 30, 2008, an Administrative Judge of the Merit Systems Protection Board issued an initial decision sustaining the agency's suspension of Southerland. The decision stated that it would become the Board's final decision on February 3, 2009 unless Southerland filed a petition for review with the Board. Southerland did not file a petition for review with the Board. The decision also informed Southerland that any petition for review seeking review by this court would be due within 60 days after the Board's decision became final. Southerland's petition, seeking review by this court, wasreceived by this court on April 13, 2009. On that same day, the clerk of this court

returned the petition for review to Southerland, informing Southerland by letter that to be timely filed the petition had to be received by the court within 60 days from the date of the final decision, i.e., on or before April 6, 2009. In his motion, Southerland states that he mailed the petition on April 3, 2009 by certified mail. Our review of a Board decision or order is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1), which provides that "[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, any petition for review must be filed within 60 days after the date the petitioner received notice of the final order or decision of the board." This filing period is "statutory, mandatory, [and] jurisdictional." Monzo v. Dep't of Transportation, 735 F.2d 1335, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 1984); see also Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007) (the timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement that cannot be waived). A petition must be received by this court by the due date; placing the petition in the mail on or before the due date does not establish timeliness. Fed. R. App. P. 25(a)(2)(A). Because Southerland's petition was not received within 60 days of the date the Board's decision became final, we must dismiss his petition as untimely. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: Southerland's petition is dismissed. All sides shall bear their own costs. FOR THE COURT 

# JUL 0 

# 2 2009 /s/ Jan Horbalv Date Jan Horbaly FILED us. COURT OF APPEALS FOR Clerk THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

2009-3182 2 JUL 02 2009
JAN HORbttLY CLERK

### cc: Robert Southerland

Vincent D. Phillips, Esq. s19 ISSUED AS A MANDATE: 

# JUL 0 2 2009

2009-3182 3
#### FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT CO. OF MARYLAND, Appellant, v. BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF ORANGE COUNTY, Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-516.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Dec. 11, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 18

- 00158

- CV

IN RE MURRIN BROTHER S 1885, LTD., ERI

- BBTX, LLC, AND CONCHO MINICK, INDIV IDUALLY AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF BILLY BOB’S TEXAS INVESTMENTS, LLC, PH ILIP MURRIN, AND COWTOWN CONC ESSIONS, INC., D/B/A RIVER RANCH STOCKYARDS RELATORS

----------

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING TRIAL COURT NO. 348

- 292200

- 17

----------



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

----------

The court has considered relators’ petition for writ of mandamus, the real

parties in interest’ s response, and the relators’ reply and is of the opinion that

relief should be denied. Accordingly, relators’ petition for writ of mandamus is

denied.

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8(d).2 PER CURIAM

PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; SUDDERTH, C.J.; and MEIER, J.

DELIVERED: July 3, 2018
### THIRD COURT OF APPEALS 

## ***** CLERK'S REQUEST FOREXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE CLERK'S RECORD Appellate CaseNumber: 03-15-00011-CV Trial CourtNumber: 14-0187-C26 Style: Clare Trevarthen VS. Counsel/Party Requesting Record:



## vs. Name David Rogers Firm:



## ------------------------- Address: 1201 Spyglass Drive., Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 Nationstar Mortgage, LLC; Auction.com; Jeremiah McClain: PamelaCirkiel ShamicaThomas; and Helen G. Kinneman Phone: 512-923-1836 I, Angela Garcia. Deputy ofWilliamson County District Clerk, am unable to file the clerk'srecord in the above styled case by January 23, 2015 for the following reasons: 

# xxxx Appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay for the record. Appellant has only made apartial payment for the record. Appellant has made required payment and has fled a written designation, but due to work load, Ihave been unable to completethe record. Other (specify) 2Notices have been mailed out to the attorney regarding cost ofClerks Record. As oftoday January 16, 2015, there has been no reply. I estimate the record in this appeal to be approximately 1volume(s) with each volume being no more 1MB. Itis respectfully requested that an extensionbe grantedto: (date) February 27,2015 LISA DAVID Address:**-------~:;D-Hi~st-Rrit--~ct:-~.C,.+[fG-l€r;'-l'ok-------** Williamson County P. 0. Box 24 Telephone: (512) _943-1212

___ _ Fax: (512)_943-1222

_____ _ Additional informationreflected on back

***PLEASE RETURN ORIGINAL TO COURT OF APPEALS- DO NOT FAX***

Third Court ofAppeals, P.O. Box 12547, Capital Station, Austin, TX 78711-2547
Exhibit
4.70


 


Summary
of the Public Deed of Purchase and Sale of Real Property, entered into on December 14, 2020, in connection with Fazenda Bananal
IX.


 


Parties:
Agrifirma Agro Ltda. (formerly known as Agrifirma Brasil S.A), as Seller; and Ires Ricardo Basso, as Buyer.


 


Purpose: The
sale of a total area of 510,5279 hectares from Fazenda Bananal IX, for the total price, in
Brazilian national currency (Reais), of R$3,305,100.00, which was paid upfront on November
11, 2020.
#### Jimmy D. HUTCHESON and Vernon Hutcheson, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. S-110.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Jan. 30, 1973.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, and William C. Owen, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellants.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and H. Tucker Cotten, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellants having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting Chief Judge, and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of SMTEK International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/Afor the period ended December 31,2002 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edward J. Smith, ChiefExecutive Officer and President of the Company, certify, to the best of myknowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Date: October 2, 2003 |
|-----------------------|
|                  |
| By:                   |   /s/ Edward J. Smith |   |
|                  | Edward J. Smith |
|                  | Chief Executive Officer and President |
|                  | SMTEK International, Inc. |

 

1

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6792

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DAVID WAYNE DAVIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior

District Judge. (CR-00-359; CA-05-273-1)

Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 23, 2005

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Wayne Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Gordon Dean Kromberg, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

David Wayne Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing as untimely his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in

a § 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district

court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and

that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are

also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.

Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Davis has not made the

requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Memo

Financing Marketable All Other Change in End-Of-Quarter

Need Borrowing Sources Total Cash Balance Cash Balance

Quarter Announcement Date (1) (2) (3) (4) = (2) + (3) (5) = (4) - (1) (6)

Oct - Dec

2007 Actual 91 87 (14) 73 (18) 57

Jan - Mar

2008 Actual 187 191 (15) 176 (11) 46

Apr - Jun

2008 Actual (74) (45) (22) (66) 7 53

Jul - Sep

2008 Actual 179 527 (30) 497 318 372

Oct - Dec

2008 Actual 556 569 (18) 551 (5) 367

Jan - Mar

2009 Actual 565 481 (14) 467 (98) 269

Apr - Jun

2009 Actual 278 343 (17) 327 49 318

Jul - Sep

2009 Actual 415 393 (20) 372 (43) 275

Oct - Dec

2009 Actual 340 260 (3) 258 (82) 194

Jan - Mar

2010 Actual 446 483 (12) 471 25 219

Apr - Jun

2010 Actual 263 344 (10) 334 71 290

Jul - Sep

2010 Actual 362 396 (14) 382 20 310

Oct - Dec

2010 Actual 326 363 (4) 359 33 343

Jan - Mar January 31, 2011 503 237 (11) 226 (277) 65

2011 May 2, 2011 470 265 (20) 245 (225) 118

Memo: Forecast Revision (34) 28 (9) 19 53 53

Apr - Jun January 31, 2011 258 299 (10) 288 30 95

2011 May 2, 2011 151 142 (14) 128 (23) 95

Memo: Forecast Revision (107) (156) (4) (160) (53) 0

Jul - Sep

2011 May 2, 2011 366 405 (20) 386 20 115

Sources and Uses Reconciliation Table

Financing
Exhibit 99

CONSOLIDATED NATURAL GAS COMPANY
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED EARNINGS STATEMENT
(Unaudited)



|                             | Twelve Months
EndedMarch 31, 2005(millions)
|---------------------------- | -------------------------------------------
|Operating Revenue            | $6,858                                     
|                             |                                            
|Operating Expenses           | 5,387                                      
|                             |                                            
|Income from operations       | 1,471                                      
|                             |                                            
|Other income (loss)          | 29                                         
|                             |                                            
|Interest and related charges | 182                                        
|                             |                                            
|Income before income taxes   | 1,318                                      
|                             |                                            
|Income taxes                 | 475                                        
|                             |                                            
|Net income                   | $   843