alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 2104 Filed 10/25/16 Page 153 of 158 

FTC’s Proposed Partial Stipulated Order for
 

Permanent Injunction and Monetary Judgment
 

Attachment 4 
Information about settlements with: 

The United States and California (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Air Resources Board, California Attorney General); 

the U.S. Federal Trade Commission; and 2.0 Liter VW/Audi TDI car owners and lessees 

Court Approved U.S. Volkswagen I Audi Diesel Emissions Settlement 

Month 00, 2016 

Dear Jane Smith, 

The Court has approved settlements with Volkswagen regarding diesel emissions from 

Volkswagen or Audi 2.0 liter diesel vehicles. If you are eligible, you may submit a claim now. 

Current owners and lessees can choose: 

$ 

OR

a buyback of your car 

or early lease termination 

if approved by EPA and CARS 

a modification to your car 

to improve emissions 

+cash 

Some former owners and lessees are also eligible to receive cash. 

HOW IT WORKS 

VWCourtSettlement.com 

Visit VWCourtSettlement.com. 

Enter your VIN to see if your car 

qualifies and how much 

compensation you will receive. 

Includes these 2.0-liter diesel cars: 

You'll get information 

about your options, 

including the timing. 

If you are eligible, you 

can file a claim on the 

site now. 

You can wait until you 

receive more information 

about whether there will be

a modification available to 

improve emissions from 

your car. 

VW Beetle 

2013-2015 

VW Golf 

2010-2015 

VW Jetta

2009-2015 

VW Passat

2012-2015 

Audi A3 

2010-2013, 2015 

Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 2104 Filed 10/25/16 Page 154 of 158
#### Robert A. MAERKLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 78-392, 78-393.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 27, 1978.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, Bar-tow, and Karal B. Rushing, Asst. Public Defender, Tampa, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard G. Pippinger, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The trial court failed to specify the exact amount of credit appellant is to receive for time served. Therefore, we remand this case with instructions that it now do so. *Knight v. State,*349 So.2d 232 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Appellant need not be present for this purpose.

BOARDMAN, Acting C. J., and SCHEB and OTT, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                             _______________________

                                    FORM 8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT

                             _______________________

                     PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE
                         SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

                Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):

                                 October 2, 2006

                       Diamond Hill Investment Group, Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

                                      Ohio
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation)

             000-24498                              65-0190407
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      (Commission File Number)         (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

      325 John H. McConnell Blvd., Suite 200, Columbus, Ohio        43215
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      (Address of Principal Executive Offices)                    (Zip Code)

Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code:   (614) 255-3333


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          (Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)

<PAGE>

Item 8.01.	Other Events
----------	--------------------------------------------

     On October 2, 2006, the company announced it has hired William C. Dierker
as a Portfolio Manager.  A copy of the press release issued by the company is
attached as Exhibit 99.1.

Item 9.01.	Financial Statements and Exhibits
----------	--------------------------------------------

     (c) Exhibits.

     99.1	Press release dated October 2, 2006 issued by the company.


                                    SIGNATURE
                                    ---------

     Pursuant to the  requirements  of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant  has duly  caused  this  report  to be  signed  on its  behalf
by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

                                        DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.


Date: October 2, 2006                         By: /s/ James F. Laird
                                            -------------------------------
                                            James F. Laird, Chief Financial
                                             Officer and Secretary
#### STATE of Louisiana in the Interest of Peter CLARK.

No. 6509.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

June 28, 1978.

Whitehead & McCoy by Charles R. Whitehead, Jr., Natchitoches, for appellant.

Eric Harrington, Asst. Dist. Atty., Natch-itoches, for appellee.

Before CULPEPPER, FORET and CUTRER, JJ.

FORET, Judge.

For the reasons stated in the companion case of *State of Louisiana In The Interest of Donald Feazell,*360 So.2d 907 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1978), (our docket number 6510), in which a separate decision has been rendered by us on this date, the judgment appealed herein is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 111 (Friday, June 8, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 26708]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12307]



[[Page 26708]]

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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice: 18-050]


Planetary Science Advisory Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 
announces a meeting of the Planetary Science Advisory Committee (PAC). 
This Committee functions in an advisory capacity to the Director, 
Planetary Science Division, in the NASA Science Mission Directorate. 
The meeting will be held for the purpose of soliciting, from the 
planetary science community and other persons, scientific and technical 
information relevant to program planning.

DATES: Monday, July 2, 2018, 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held telephonically and via WebEx. Any 
interested person may dial the USA toll free conference call number 1-
800-779-9966 or toll number 1-517-645-6359, passcode 3954829, followed 
by the # sign, to participate in this meeting. The WebEx link is 
https://nasa.webex.com/; the meeting number is 994 146 371, password is 
PAC@July2 (case sensitive).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. KarShelia Henderson, Science 
Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 
358-2355, fax (202) 358-2779, or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#157e7d707b717067667a7b557b7466743b727a63"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="abc0c3cec5cfced9d8c4c5ebc5cad8ca85ccc4dd">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The agenda for the meeting includes the 
following topics:

--Planetary Science Division Update
--Planetary Science Division Research and Analysis Program Update

    It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to 
accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants.

Patricia Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2018-12307 Filed 6-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7510-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Allen Wayne SUMMERSILL and James Monroe Gandy, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. T-212.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Jan. 15, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Joan Kraft, Appellant, v Michael Kamalian, M.D., Respondent.

[735 NYS2d 540]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Esposito, J.), entered October 16, 2000, which granted defendant’s motion for a change of venue from Bronx County to Orange County, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and the motion denied, without costs.

In this medical malpractice action, commenced in November 1996, the motion court erred in granting defendant’s motion for a change of venue from Bronx County, where plaintiff resided from the summer of 1995 until late 1998, to Orange County, where she received medical treatment from defendant from 1991 through 1995, and where she resided during that time.

The motion, brought more than three years after the commencement of the action, and more than a year after the filing of the note of issue, was untimely (CPLR 511 [a]; see *also, Campos v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*163 AD2d 49). Further, “a subsequent change of residence to another county does not invalidate the original designation based upon plaintiffs’ residence at the time of the commencement of the action” *(Iassinski v Vassiliev,*220 AD2d 372, 374, citing *Cardona v Aggressive Heating,*180 AD2d 572, 573).

As to the two physician witnesses claimed to be inconvenienced by the Bronx venue, one was an employee of defendant (see, *Katz v Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.,*116 AD2d 506), and as to the other, defendant has not satisfied the four-part evidentiary requirement for convenience of nonparty witnesses (see, *O’Brien v Vassar Bros. Hosp.,*207 AD2d 169). Concur— Williams, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.
News Media Contact(s): 

(202) 586-4940

For Immediate Release

December 7, 2009

Department of Energy Issues Final Rule on Loan Guarantees

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced the issue of a final rule 

amending the Department of Energy’s regulations for its Loan Guarantee Program. The revised rule will 

allow for increased participation in the program by financial institutions and other investors and enable 

the support of more innovative energy technologies in the United States. 

“This much needed change will provide greater flexibility to the Loan Guarantee Program and help us to 

support more projects at a better value to taxpayers,” said Secretary Chu. “This is part of our 

commitment to ensuring businesses are able to access the support they need to create jobs and contribute 

to a clean energy economy.” 

Under the rule change, the Loan Guarantee Program will be able to consider financing projects together 

with other lenders and will be able to provide loan guarantees to projects with multiple participants (who 

may hold undivided interests in a project). As an example, export credit agencies and other financial 

institutions will now be able to provide financing to complement Title XVII loans and loan guarantees. 

This approach will result in lowered risk and potential costs to taxpayers. 

The U.S. Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program paves the way for federal support of clean 

energy projects that use innovative technologies, and is aimed at spurring further investment in these 

advanced technologies. The Department incorporated feedback from industry and other interested 

parties in order to maximize the reach and success of the program. 

On August 7, 2009, the Department published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Opportunity for 

Comment announcing the effort to change the regulations. A 30-day comment period was extended an 

additional two weeks in response to public requests. DOE carefully reviewed all of the timely comments 

on the NOPR from over 2,100 interested parties. 

Copies of the proposed rule will be available from the Department’s Loan Guarantee Program. 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Public Affairs, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of Energy Page 1 of 1

http://www.energy.gov/news2009/print2009/8369.htm 1/21/2010
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: AUTOZONERS, LLC

,

Relator

. §

§

§

§ No. 08

- 21

- 00 065

- CV

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MA NDAMUS

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Real Part y in Interest motion for extension of time within which

to file the response to Relator ’ s petition for wri t of mandamus until September 14 , 2021 . NO

FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE REAL PARTY IN

INTEREST ’S RESPONSE TO RELATOR ’ S PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS WILL

BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ordered that the Hon. John P. Mobbs

, the R eal Party in Interest ’s attorney,

prepare the R e al Party in Interest response to Relator ’ s petition for writ of mandamus and forward

the same to this Court on or before September 14 , 2021.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 13 th day of August , 2021.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox and Alley, JJ.
EXHIBIT 15

First Commerce Corporation
New Orleans, Louisiana




Gentlemen:

RE:   September 30, 1996 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q

With respect to the subject Quarterly Report, we acknowledge
our  awareness  of the inclusion therein of our report dated
October 21, 1996  related to our review of interim financial
information and that  said  report  will  be included in any
registration  statement filed by First Commerce  Corporation
through incorporation  by reference of the subject Quarterly
Report into such registration statements.

Pursuant  to Rule 436(c)  under  the  Securities  Act,  such
report is not  considered a part of a Registration Statement
prepared or certified  by an accountant or a report prepared
or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections
7 and 11 of the Act.

                                   /s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
                                   ________________________
                                   ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP




New Orleans, Louisiana
November 13, 1996
## United States Court of Appeals
**For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________

No. 20

- 2671

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Jason L. Foster

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Joplin

____________

Submitted: May 4, 2021

Filed: May 10, 2021 [Unpublished]

____________ Before COLLOTON, BENTON, a nd STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Jason Foster pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute methamphetamine. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846. As part of his plea agreement, he waived “ his right to appeal his sentence” unless, as relevant here, it exceeded the statutory-2- maximum. The district court 1 gave him a 168

- month sentence, which is below the statutory maximum. See id. § 841(b)(1)(A). In an Anders brief, Foster’s counsel discusses the appeal waiver and the sentence, as well as requests permission to
withdraw

. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Upon careful review, we conclude that the waiver is both enforceable and applicable. See United States v. Scott , 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (rev iewing this issue de novo); United States v. Andis , 333 F.3d 886, 889

– 92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (explaining that an appeal waiver will be enforced if the appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into t he plea agreement and the waiver, and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice). We have also independently reviewed the record and
conclude that no other non

- frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75,
82

– 83 (1988). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel permission to
withdraw.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
----

**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|  | (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 result of operations of the                Company. |
|--|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  Date:                August 9, 2007 | By:    | /s/                William Prouty                    |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                                      |   | William                Prouty                        |
|                                      |   | President                and Chief Executive Officer |

----
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   Exhibit 10(a)

                                 AMENDMENT NO. 8
                                     TO THE
                                TRANSMATION, INC.
                   AMENDED AND RESTATED 1993 STOCK OPTION PLAN

                           EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 8, 2001


         WHEREAS, Transmation, Inc., an Ohio corporation (the "Company"), has
established the Transmation, Inc. Amended and Restated 1993 Stock Option Plan,
as heretofore amended (the "Plan"); and

         WHEREAS, deeming it appropriate and advisable so to do, and pursuant to
Section 19 of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Company has authorized,
approved and adopted the further amendment to the Plan set forth herein;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended, effective February 8, 2001,
as follows:

               1. Section 8(b)(vii) of the Plan is hereby renumbered to be
Section 8(b)(viii) of the Plan (with the substance of said Section 8(b)(viii),
as so renumbered, being unchanged and unaffected by this Amendment and
continuing in full force and effect).

               2. A new Section 8(b)(vii) is hereby added to Section "8. TERM OF
OPTIONS; EXERCISABILITY." of the Plan, to provide in its entirety as follows
(with the remainder of said Section 8 being unchanged and unaffected by the
amendment set forth in this Paragraph 2 and continuing in full force and
effect):

                             "(vii) Each Option, if any, granted during the 2001
               calendar year shall vest and become exercisable as follows:

                                    "(A) 25 percent of the Option shall first
                             become exercisable on the date, if any, after the
                             Grant Date on which Fair Market Value shall have
                             equaled or exceeded $3.50 per share for any 20 of
                             30 consecutive trading days;

                                    "(B) an additional 25 percent of the Option
                             shall first become exercisable on the date, if any,
                             after January 1, 2002 on which Fair Market Value
                             shall have equaled or exceeded $6.00 per share for
                             any 20 of 30 consecutive trading days;

                                    "(C) an additional 25 percent of the Option
                             shall first become exercisable on the date, if any,
                             after January 1, 2003 on which Fair Market Value
                             shall have equaled or exceeded $9.00 per share for
                             any 20 of 30 consecutive trading days; and
<PAGE>

Exhibit 23.5

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS'

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this
Prospectus constituting part of this Registration Statement on Form
S-8 of our report on Long Distance Network, Inc. dated June 22,
1994 appearing on page F-1 of SA Telecommunications, Inc. Current
Report on Form 8-K/A-2 dated May 16, 1994.   We also consent to the
reference to us under the heading "Experts" in such Prospectus.

/s/ Samson, Robbins & Associates, P.L.L.C.

SAMSON, ROBBINS & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C.

Dallas, Texas
March 1, 1996
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 147 (Tuesday, July 31, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45345-45346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18626]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

DOE/Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Office of Science, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Advanced Scientific 
Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC). The Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these 
meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Tuesday, August 14, 2012, 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.; Wednesday, August 
15, 2012, 9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: American Geophysical Union (AGU), 2000 Florida Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20009-1277.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melea Baker, Office of Advanced 
Scientific Computing Research; SC-21/Germantown Building; U.S. 
Department of Energy; 1000 Independence Avenue SW; Washington, DC 
20585-1290; Telephone (301)-903-7486.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of this meeting is to provide 
advice and guidance on a continuing basis to the Department of Energy 
on scientific priorities within the field of advanced scientific 
computing research.
    Tentative Agenda Topics:
     View from Washington
     View from Germantown
     Update on Exascale
     Update from Committee of Visitors for Computer Science 
activities
     Facilities update including early science efforts

[[Page 45346]]

     Early Career technical talks
     Recompetition results for Scientific Discovery through 
Advanced Computing (SciDAC) applications
     Co-design
     Public Comment (10-minute rule)
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. A webcast 
of this meeting may be available. Please check the Web site below for 
updates and information on how to view the meeting. If you would like 
to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either 
before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements 
regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact Melea 
Baker by telephone at (301) 903-7486 or email at: 
Melea.Baker@science.doe.gov. You must make your request for an oral 
statement at least 5 business days prior to the meeting. Reasonable 
provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the 
agenda. The Chairperson of the Committee will conduct the meeting to 
facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow 
the 10-minute rule.
    Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available on the U.S. 
Department of Energy's Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Web site 
(www.sc.doe.gov/ascr) for viewing.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on July 25, 2012.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-18626 Filed 7-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```