alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SERVED JANUARY 4, 2011 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

•I'RTMENTOF 

:.ePORWIOM 

JPPAT NS I 

^'AN -U P 2^55 

IN THE MATTER OF 

FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP09NM0010 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-2009 - 0721 

AMENDED POST HEARING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

This matter came for hearing on October 25, 2010 in Portland, OR. The hearing 

transcript is forthcoming. 

WHEREFORE, the parties shall adhere to the following Post Hearing Briefing 

Schedule: 

1. Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter "Complainant") shall file its 

Post-Hearing Brief on or before January 28, 2011; 

2. Federal Express, Inc. (hereinafter "Respondent") shall file its Post-Hearing 

Brief on or before February 14, 2011; and 

3. Complainant shall file its Rebuttal Brief, if any, on or before February 22, 

2011. 

iichard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment(s) - Service List 
3. C»p,ai„a„, 3ha„ file i,. Reb^, , Brief, if a.y. on or before March , I 

ichard (X/Goodwh[ _ ^ 

•S. Administrative Law^Jiidge 

Attachment(s) - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP09NM0010 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Courtney E. Felts, Respondent's Counsel 

Staff Attorney, Federal Express, Inc. 

3620 Hacks Cross Road 

Building B, 3^'' Floor 

Memphis, TN 38125-8800 

TEL: 901-434-8632 

FAX: 901-434-8283 

Lawrence W. Bierlein, Respondent's Counsel 

1101 30* Street, NW, Suite 500 

Washington, DC 20007 

TEL: 202-625-8355 

FAX: 202-625-4363 

* 

Scott R. Morris, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, WA 98057 

TEL: 425-227-1417 

FAX: 425-227-1007 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attorney-Advisor 202-366-2139 

Legal Assistant 202-366-5121 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Hearing Docket, Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S. W., Wilbur Wright Building -

Room 2014, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
#### Harold Q. LONG, Appellant, v. Mary A. LONG, Appellee.

No. 70-852.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 22, 1971.

Rehearing Denied April 27, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32(b)

                          Section 906 Certification
                                    of
                             Mark E. Maddocks

     I certify that the Quarterly Report of Dataram Corporation with
which this Certification is furnished fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and that the information contained in the periodic report
fully presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Dataram Corporation.



March 9, 2004                      MARK E. MADDOCKS

                                   _______________________

                                   Mark E. Maddocks
                                   Vice President, Finance and
                                   Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 23, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 67084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33375]



[[Page 67084]]

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 97N-0182]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of OMB 
Approval

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a 
collection of information entitled ``Requests for Samples and 
Protocols: Official Release'' has been approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(the PRA).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JonnaLynn P. Capezzuto, Office of 
Information Resources Management (HFA-250), Food and Drug 
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-4659.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of September 19, 
1997 (62 FR 49244), the agency announced that the proposed information 
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 
section 3507 of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3507). An agency may not conduct or 
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of 
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. 
OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB 
control number 0910-0206. The approval expires on November 30, 2000.

    Dated: December 16, 1997.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy Coordination.
[FR Doc. 97-33375 Filed 12-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
**Exhibit 35.1**

 

**Servicer Compliance Statement of John Deere Capital Corporation**

 

I, Michael Matera, Senior Vice President and Controller of John Deere Capital Corporation, state:

 

A review of the activities of John Deere Capital Corporation (“JDCC”) for the period from April 22, 2010 (the date of issuance of the John Deere Owner Trust 2010 transaction subject to the requirements of Regulation AB) through October 31, 2010 (the “Reporting Period”) and of JDCC’s performance under the Sale & Servicing Agreement dated as of April 22, 2010 among JDCC, John Deere Receivables, Inc. and John Deere Owner Trust 2010 has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge, based on such review JDCC has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 
| Date:   January 12, 2011 | John   Deere Capital Corporation |
|-------------------------------|----------------------------------|
|                          |                             |
|                          |                             |
|                          |                             |
|                          | By                               | /s/   *Michael Matera* |   |
|                          |                             | Michael   Matera |
|                          |                             | Senior   Vice President and Controller |

 

15

----
#### Bernard BERMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, ex rel., Broward WILLIAMS, et al., Appellees. Irwin WEINER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, ex rel., Broward WILLIAMS, et al., Appellees.

Nos. L-87, L-88.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

June 17, 1969.

Rehearings Denied July 15,1969.

PER CURIAM.

Interlocutory appeal dismissed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Donald STEWART, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-50047.

D.C. No. CR-00-00605-R.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 12, 2002.*

Decided Aug. 19, 2002.

Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Donald Stewart appeals his 24-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to launder money and money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(h) and (a)(1)(B)®. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we dismiss the appeal.

Stewart contends that the district court erred by failing to depart downward pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 after expressing its intention to do so. The Government contends that the district court did depart downward.

Whether or not the district court departed downward pursuant to § 5K1.1 is immaterial because it is clear that the district court knew it had the legal authority to do so. *See United States v. Hanna,*49 F.3d 572, 576 (9th Cir.1995). Because the district court recognized its discretion to depart downward, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. *See id.*(stating that a district court’s discretionary refusal to depart downward or discretionary decision in fixing the extent of a downward departure pursuant to section 5K1.1 is unreviewable on appeal).

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 243 (Thursday, December 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 66387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33015]



[[Page 66387]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement


Request for Determination of Valid Existing Rights Within the 
Wayne National Forest; Correction

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of decision; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a correction to a November 26, 1997 
Federal Register notice (62 FR 63187) which announced the decision of 
the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) on a 
request by Edward and Madeiline Blaire and Buckingham Coal Company, 
Inc. (Buckingham) for a determination of valid existing rights (VER) 
under section 522(e) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 
of 1977 (SMCRA). The required correction pertains to part VII. of the 
notice, entitled ``Appeals.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Michael, Office of Surface 
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Appalachian Regional Coordinating 
Center, Room 218, Three Parkway Center, Pittsburgh, PA 15220. 
Telephone: (412) 937-2867. E-mail address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2b5b464248434a4e476b445846594e054c445d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="22524f4b414a43474e624d514f50470c454d54">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register notice published on 
November 26, 1997 (62 FR 63187), Part VII in the decision stated:

    Any person who is or may be adversely affected by this decision 
may appeal to the Interior Board of Land Appeals under 43 CFR 4.1390 
et seq. [1988]. Notice of intent to appeal must be filed within 30 
days from the date of publication of this notice of decision in a 
local newspaper with circulation in Perry County, Ohio.

    However, 43 CFR 4.1391 states, in relevant part:

    The request for review shall be filed within 30 days of the date 
of publication of notice in the Federal Register that a 
determination has been made for any person who has not received a 
copy by certified mail or overnight delivery service.

    Accordingly, any person who is or may be adversely affected by the 
VER decision in this matter may appeal to the Interior Board of Land 
Appeals under 43 CFR 4.1390 et seq. [1988]. Notice of intent to appeal 
must be filed within 30 days of the date of publication of the notice 
of decision in the Federal Register, which was on November 26, 1997, by 
any person who has not received a copy by certified mail or overnight 
delivery service.

    Dated: December 12, 1997.
Allen D. Klein,
Regional Director, Appalachian Regional Coordinating Center.
[FR Doc. 97-33015 Filed 12-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
254 La. 835

#### MICHIGAN WISCONSIN PIPE LINE COMPANY v. Douglas Joseph WALET et al.

No. 50075.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 10, 1969.

In re: Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Company applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Iberia. 225 So.2d 76.

Writs refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal the judgment is correct.

McCALEB and BARHAM, JJ., are of the opinion that the application should he granted.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67353-67354]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33517]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP96-199-009]


Mississippi River Transmission Corporation; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

December 18, 1997.

    Take notice that on December 15, 1997, Mississippi River 
Transmission Corporation (MRT) tendered for filing as part of its FERC 
Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed on 
Appendix A to the filing, to be effective January 1, 1998.
    MRT states that the purpose of this filing is to place the Period 
III rates into effect and eliminate Flexible Contract Demand, in 
accordance with the Stipulation and Agreement filed in this proceeding 
and approved by the Commission. In addition, as a result of the 
Commission's comments in its order, MRT is not removing the definition 
of Receipt Point MDQ from the Tariff but is instead revising the 
definition to conform with the removal of Flexible Contract Demand.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in 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 with the

[[Page 67354]]

Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-33517 Filed 12-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2457 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2457

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the disapproval 
by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of courses of education offered by 
public institutions of higher learning that do not charge veterans the 
   in-State tuition rate for purposes of Survivors' and Dependents' 
                    Educational Assistance Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 13, 2021

Mr. Moore of Alabama introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the disapproval 
by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of courses of education offered by 
public institutions of higher learning that do not charge veterans the 
   in-State tuition rate for purposes of Survivors' and Dependents' 
                    Educational Assistance Program.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Colonel John McHugh Tuition Fairness 
for Survivors Act''.

SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS DISAPPROVAL OF COURSES OFFERED 
              BY PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING THAT DO NOT 
              CHARGE VETERANS THE IN-STATE TUITION RATE FOR PURPOSES OF 
              SURVIVORS' AND DEPENDENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE 
              PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Section 3679(c) of title 38, United States Code, 
is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``or 33'' and inserting 
        ``33, or 35'';
            (2) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following 
        new subparagraph:
            ``(D) An individual who is entitled to assistance under 
        section 3510 of this title.''; and
            (3) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and 33'' and inserting 
        ``33, and 35''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 3679(e) of such title is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)--
                    (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or 33'' and 
                inserting ``, 33, or 35''; and
                    (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or 33'' and 
                inserting ``33, or 35''; and
            (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``or 33'' and inserting 
        ``33, or 35''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this Act shall take 
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply with 
respect to an academic period that begins on or after August 1, 2022.
                                 <all>
```
P.1 

RCRA Box 321 

Prepped by Ryan Dugan 

Document Number: 

247) OGRC-S0039 

Docket Number: 

F-93-OGRC-FFFFF 

Printed 5/8/20073:36:33 PM Sheet 247 of 259 
P.2 

0£tf£-S"003<J 

<,fcO ST4. 

HI USB o 

, 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

OFFICE OF 

SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE 

iWf 2 1 1991 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Status of Wastes from thejCry4e Oil Reclamation 

Industry 

FROM: Sylvia K. Lowrance, 

Office of Solid Wast 

TO: Regional Waste Management Division Directors 

EPA Regions 1-10 

The attached letter from Don Clay to a representative of the 

crude oil reclaimer industry is provided for your information. 

In September 1990, several representatives of the crude oil 

reclaimer industry made a request of the Agency to provide an 

interpretation of the 1988 Regulatory Determination pertaining to 

Subtitle C coverage of oil and gas exploration and production 

(E&P) wastes with respect to wastes from crude oil and tank 

bottom reclaimers. The Regulatory Determination stated that 

liquid and solid wastes generated by crude oil and tank bottom 

reclaimers were not included in the original (statutory) 

exemption from Subtitle C requirements. The attached letter 

interprets this language to mean that reclaimer wastes that are 

derived only from exempt oil and gas E&P wastes are exempt from 

Subtitle C requirements. 

As indicated in the attached correspondence, we plan to 

publish an interpretive notice in the Federal Register on this 

subject within a few months. The attached letter also provides, 

as broad guidance until publication of the notice, some examples 

for determining which crude oil reclaimer wastes are exempt from 

Subtitle C. 

If you have any questions concerning this subject, please 

contact Bob Tonetti at (703) 308-8426. 

Attachment 

Printed on Recycled Paper
Exhibit 31.4

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Louis J. Arcudi, III, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Idera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

/s/ Louis J. Arcudi, IIILouis J. Arcudi, IIIChief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary


Date: April 30, 2013
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0292

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

vs. 

CHALON MICHAEL KINHOLT,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including October 9, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 5 2024

09/05/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0292
#### David Stuart KING, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Raymond ANDREWS, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 01-16365.

D.C. No. CV-00-06032-REC.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 14, 2002.*

Decided Aug. 16, 2002.

Before HALL, KOZINSKI, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

David Stuart King was sentenced separately for failing to appear for trial and for the underlying offense of distributing methamphetamine. We have previously held that when an individual is convicted separately for failing to appear for trial and for the underlying offense, the combined sentence may be no longer than if the two charges had been joined in a single trial and grouped for sentencing. *United States v. Jernigan,*60 F.3d 562, 564 (9th Cir.1995). The Sentencing Guidelines instruct that when a defendant is convicted of an offense, his failure to appear for trial *263warrants a two-level enhancement pursuant to § 3G1.1. U.S.S.G. § 2J1.6 n. 3. King received a 121-month sentence for distributing methamphetamine; that sentence included a two-level enhancement. The Bureau of Prisons, however, calculated King’s release date to have him serve not only the 121-month sentence, but an additional 36-month sentence imposed after his separate conviction for failing to appear for trial on the methamphetamine charges. The government acknowledges, and we agree, that the Bureau of Prisons erroneously calculated King’s release date and that the writ of habeas corpus should have been granted.

REVERSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Order filed August 10, 2021

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14

- 21

- 00361

- CV

___________

IN THE INTEREST OF E.J.A., E.B.A., AND E.P.A., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 245th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court C ause No. 321010245

O R D E R

No reporter’s record has been filed in this case. The official court reporter

for the 245th District Court informed this court that appellant had not requested

preparation of or made arrangements for payment for the report e r’s record. On

July 2

, 2021, the clerk of this court notified appellant that we would consider and

decide those issues that do not require a reporter s record unless appellant, within

15 days of notice, provided this court with proof of payment for the r ecord. See

T ex. R. App

. P. 37.3(c). Appellant filed no reply.

Unless appellant provides this court with proof the record has been re quested

and payment arran gem ents have been made, appellant s ’ brief will be set due when

the clerk ’ s record is filed, and we w i ll consider and decide those issues that do n ot

require a reporter ’ s recor d.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Hassan and Poissant.