alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 1 (Friday, January 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79-80]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-34232]


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

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

DATE & TIME: Tuesday, January 6, 1998 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

    Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. Sec. 437g.
    Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. Sec. 437g, Sec. 438(b), and 
Title 26, U.S.C.
    Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or 
arbitration.
    Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a 
particular employee.

DATE & TIME: Thursday, January 8, 1998 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. (ninth Floor).

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

    Correction and Approval of Minutes.
    Audit: San Diego Host Committee/Sail to Victory '96 (continued from 
meeting of December 4, 1997).
    Audit: Committee on Arrangements for the 1996 Republican National

[[Page 80]]

Convention (continued from meeting of December 4, 1997).
    Administrative Matters.

PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: Mr. Ron Harris, Press Officer; 
Telephone: (202) 219-4155.
[FR Doc. 97-34232 Filed 12-30-97; 2:41pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
#### Willard Patrick JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 71-302.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 20, 1971.

Habeas corpus denied.
ex10_39.htm




Exhibit 10.39












Director Compensation Policy


 


The following table sets forth the compensation payable to nonemployee directors of Lexmark International, Inc.:


 



	
Annual Retainer Fee

	
$60,000


	
Annual Retainer Fee – Finance and Audit Committee

	
$15,000


	
Annual Retainer Fee – Compensation and Pension Committees

	
$10,000


	
Annual Retainer Fee – Other Committees

	
$  8,000


	
Annual Chair Retainer Fee – Finance and Audit Committee

	
$25,000


	
Annual Chair Retainer Fee – Compensation and Pension Committees

	
$15,000


	
Annual Chair Retainer Fee – Other Committees

	
$10,000


	
Presiding Director Annual Retainer Fee

	
$25,000


	
Initial Equity Award (Restricted Stock Units)

	
$150,000


	
Annual Equity Award (Restricted Stock Units)

	
$150,000












 


Terms of Equity Awards


 


Initial Equity Award (Restricted Stock Units)


 



	
  

	
●

	
Grant Date: Date of Election to the Board







 



	
  

	
●

	
Number of RSUs: Face value of award divided by the closing price of Lexmark Class A Common Stock on the Grant Date, rounded up to the nearest whole share







 



	
  

	
●

	
Vesting: 100% vested on the sixth anniversary of the Grant Date







 



	
  

	
●

	
Settlement: On termination of status as a Board member







 


Annual Equity Award (Restricted Stock Units)


 



	
  

	
●

	
Grant Date:  Annual Meeting of Stockholders.  For Eligible Directors appointed to the Board at any time after the Annual Meeting of Stockholders, the annual equity award will be prorated for the remaining months of service until the next scheduled Annual Meeting of Stockholders







 



	
  

	
●

	
Number of RSUs: Face value of award divided by the closing price of Lexmark Class A Common Stock on the Grant Date, rounded up to the nearest whole share







 



	
  

	
●

	
Vesting: 100% vested on the date immediately preceding the next Annual Meeting of Stockholders







 



	
  

	
●

	
Settlement: 34% on the second anniversary of the date of grant and 33% on each of the third and fourth anniversaries of the date of grant







 


Deferred Stock Units: Pursuant to the terms of the Lexmark International, Inc. 2005 Nonemployee Director Stock Plan, each nonemployee director may defer his or her retainer and/or meeting fees into Deferred Stock Units based on the fair market value of Lexmark Class A Common Stock on the date of deferral. The Deferred Stock Units are eligible for settlement initially on June 30th in the fifth year following the date of grant.


 


 


As approved by Board (2-20-2014)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 


FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 


OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 


) 

In the Matter of ) 

) 

GRACOINC., ) 

a corporation, and ) 

) DOCKET NO. 9350 

ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS INC., ) 

a corporation, and ) 

) 

ITW FINISHING LLC, ) 

a limited liability company, ) 

Respondents. ) 

) 

ORDER DESIGNATING ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE 

Pursuant to authority vested in the Federal Trade Commission and delegated to 

the Chief Administrative Law Judge, 

IT IS ORDERED that D. Michael Chappell, Chief Administrative Law Judge of 

this Commission, be, and hereby is, designated and appointed to take testimony and 

receive evidence in this proceeding and to perform all other duties authorized by law. 

ORDERED: 

Date: December 16, 2011
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 30 (Thursday, February 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 6809]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3598]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[NAFTA-001365]


Dudley Apparel Dudley, GA; Notice of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Title V of the North American Free Trade Agreement 
Implementation Act (Pub. L. 103-182) concerning transitional adjustment 
assistance, hereinafter called (NAFTA-TAA), and in accordance with 
Section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended (19 USC 2273), an investigation was initiated on 
December 2, 1996 in response to a petition filed on behalf of workers 
at Dudley Apparel, Dudley, Georgia.
    This case is being terminated because no information is available 
from petitioners or company official to complete the necessary 
investigation. Consequently, further investigation in this case would 
serve no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, D.C., this 6th day of February 1997.
Russell T. Kile,
Program Manager Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-3598 Filed 2-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                                (18 U.S.C. 1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of (18 U.S.C. 1350), the
undersigned officer of Sysview Technology, Inc., a Delaware corporation
("Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of such officer's knowledge and
belief, that:

         (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30,
         2007 (the "Form 10-QSB") of the Company 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 Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in
         all materials respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Company.

                                                         Date: August 7, 2007
                                                         /S/ DARWIN HU
                                                         -------------
                                                         Darwin Hu, Chairman and
                                                         Chief Executive Officer

This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.
Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any
filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

The following is the certification required pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

In connection with the annual report of CardioGenesis Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003 as
filed with the SEC on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael J. Quinn,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 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.

/s/ Michael J. Quinn
Chief Executive Officer
March 10, 2004

The following is the certification required pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

In connection with the annual report of CardioGenesis Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003 as
filed with the SEC on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Christine G. Ocampo Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.

/s/ Christine G. Ocampo
Chief Financial Officer
March 10, 2004

The certifications set forth above shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Clarence Wilson BURKES and Jody Renee Burkes.

No. 60657.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 28, 1977.

In re: State of La. through the District Attorney, Ossie Brown applying for supervisory writs.

Writ granted. The ruling of the trial judge is reversed and extradition is ordered in compliance with the Oklahoma request.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-50810

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIO GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:14-CR-292-4

Before JONES, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Mario Gonzalez has moved for leave 

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Gonzalez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the 

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 21, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-50810 Document: 00513557946 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2016
No. 15-50810

2

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-50810 Document: 00513557946 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2016
Christopher Harris 

General Counsel, NORA (Association of Responsible Recyclers) 

Personal Communication with IEc 

August 21, 2009 

• Most used oil is from vehicles. It’s very difficult to determine how much of the used 

oil generated is on-spec versus off-spec without a detailed survey, but he would 

estimate that 20 percent is off-spec. 

• Most used oil customers demand on-spec, so the market for off-spec used oil is pretty 

small. He estimates that 15 to 18 percent of the market is for off-spec used oil. Some 

of this goes to power plants. He believes that EPA may have a database of off-spec 

used oil burners.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7043 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7043

 To withhold funding authorized under the CARES Act from any State or 
municipality that provides economic stimulus payments through a program 
             designed to exclusively assist illegal aliens.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 28, 2020

  Mr. Buck (for himself, Mr. Biggs, Mr. Budd, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Roy, Mr. 
 DesJarlais, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Murphy of North Carolina, Mrs. Lesko, Mr. 
 Massie, Mr. Posey, Mr. King of Iowa, Mr. Crawford, Mr. Riggleman, Mr. 
  Babin, Mr. Brooks of Alabama, Mr. Gibbs, Mr. Cline, and Mr. Steube) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To withhold funding authorized under the CARES Act from any State or 
municipality that provides economic stimulus payments through a program 
             designed to exclusively assist illegal aliens.

    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 ``No Bailouts for Illegal Aliens 
Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FUNDS TO OFFSET STIMULUS CHECKS TO 
              ILLEGAL ALIENS.

    (a) In General.--Title XIII of the Emergency Appropriations for 
Coronavirus Health Response and Agency Operations (division B of Public 
Law 116-136) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating section 23008 as section 23009; and
            (2) by inserting after section 23007 the following:
    ``Sec. 23008.  Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act or 
any amendment made by this Act, no funds made available under this Act 
or by any amendment made by this Act, may be made available to a State 
or municipality (as such terms are defined in section 4002 of division 
A) unless the State or municipality has certified that it is not 
providing relief funds or similar monetary payments of any kind that 
are targeted exclusively to individuals who are believed to be 
unlawfully present in the United States.''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a)(2) shall 
apply to any funds made available under the CARES Act (Public Law 116-
136) on or after the date of the enactment of that Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

__________________________________________ 

 ) 

In the Matter of ) 

 ) 

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY N.V. ) Corrected Public Version 

 a foreign corporation, ) 

 ) 

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY ) Docket No. 9300 

 a corporation, ) 

 ) 

PITT-DES MOINES, INC., ) 

 a corporation. ) 

__________________________________________) 

AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD E. GOODRICH

1. I am Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of 

Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. ("CB&I"). 

2. In 2004, CB&I [ 

 

 ] 

3. At the time CB&I submitted these materials to the FTC, it 

designated them as highly confidential and requested that the FTC destroy or return the 

materials to CB&I [ ] 
2 

4. [ 

 

 ] 

5. [ ] CB&I 

considers [ ] its voluntary submission of 

materials to the FTC as highly confidential and extremely sensitive business information, 

the release or publication of which would substantially harm CB&I's business. 

6. To CB&I's knowledge, no one outside of CB&I, aside from certain 

individuals at the FTC [ ] 

at the time or knows about it now. 

7. Only a small number of high level executives at CB&I were ever 

privy to any information concerning [ ] This information 

constitutes a highly confidential executive level strategy, and I would not casually discuss 

it even within CB&I. 

8. CB&I has taken, and continues to take, all due precautions to 

safeguard the confidential nature of this information. 

9. Information concerning [ ] is of great 

value to CB&I because it concerns [ 

 ] 

10. CB&I expended a significant amount of effort and money pursuing 

[ 

 ] 
3 

11. Information concerning [ ] is the type of 

information that cannot be duplicated outside of CB&I and which CB&I will not allow 

anyone outside of its business to obtain. 

12. CB&I is particularly concerned that the release of this information 

would disadvantage CB&I with respect to its competitors because it would give 

competitors inside information concerning [ 

 ] In addition, CB&I voluntarily contacted the FTC and provided information to 

the FTC with the understanding that its contacts and information would be held 

confidential and not publicly disclosed, especially in an unrelated matter. 

 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of 

America that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Executed on _______________ 

__________________________ 

Richard E. Goodrich
EXHIBIT 99.3



    Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
            Di Giorgio Corporation Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



We each certify that,  to the best of our  knowledge  and belief,  the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q of Di Giorgio  Corporation  for the period  ending  June 29,
2002:

     (1)  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 Di Giorgio Corporation.



By:  /s/ Richard B. Neff                         By:  /s/ Lawrence S. Grossman
     --------------------------------------           --------------------------
Richard B. Neff                                      Lawrence S. Grossman
Co-Chairman and Chief                                Senior Vice President and
Executive Officer                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                                     (Principal Financial and
                                                     Accounting Officer)
#### Rome Lee HARMON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 78-1275.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 6, 1978.

Joseph Jordan of Bailey & Jordan, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

DOWNEY, C. J., and LETTS, J., concur.

ANSTEAD, J., concurs specially.

ANSTEAD, Judge,

concurring specially:

I agree with the majority that the order of May 5, 1978, denying the appellant’s pro se motion for post-conviction relief should be affirmed. However, I believe that one of the issue raised in the appellant’s motion merits comment. That issue involves the competency of counsel. The trial judge noted in his order of May 5:

> Paragraph 2 of defendant’s motion is simply to the effect that there were witnesses who could have been called in the defendant’s case. Defendant presented the testimony of numerous witnesses. The fact that he now thinks additional ones might have been called and he lists their names is of no consequence. Facts are not stated in support of the allegation that these witnesses would have even helped.

Subsequently, by counsel, the appellant filed a second motion alleging incompetency of trial counsel and setting out sworn, detailed statements outlining the testimony of the witnesses previously referred to in paragraph 2 of appellant’s original motion. The record shows that a different trial judge denied the second motion on the grounds that the issue had already been decided by the order of May 5, 1978, and advising the appellant that proper recourse on the issue was by appeal of the order of May 5, not by the filing of another motion for post-conviction relief. Then the appellant filed this appeal of the May 5 order.

However circuitous the route may be, I believe the appellant is entitled to an evi-dentiary hearing on his second motion for post-conviction relief. The order denying his second motion is not before us for review. But since that order itself advised the appellant that his proper remedy was *688by appeal of the May 5 order, I think we would be remiss in not commenting on the entitlement of the appellant to an eviden-tiary hearing on his second motion.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

March 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

127872 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 127872 

 COA: 250288 

St. Clair CC: 02-000283-FC 

THOMAS FRANK BRENNAN,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 30, 2004 

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. 

CAVANAGH and KELLY, JJ., would grant leave to appeal. 

s0322 

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. 

March 29, 2006 

Clerk