alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|Exhibit 31(d)                                                                                      
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification                                                             
|I, Moray P. Dewhurst, Chief Financial Officer of Florida Power & Light Company (FPL), certify that:
|1.                                                                                                 
|2.                                                                                                 
|3.                                                                                                 
|4.                                                                                                 
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|5.                                                                                                 
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|Date:   August 2, 2004                                                                             
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|                                                                                                   
|
Sh inberg, Samuel I.

From: Sheinberg, Samuel |.

Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2021 9:54 AM
To:

Ce:

Subject: RE: HSR Informal Interpretation

We agree with your analysis.

Sam

From:

Sent: Inesday, May 26, 27: -05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
i

Subject: normal Interpretation

Good afternoon, please consider this a request for an informal interpretation:

The Acquiring Person currently holds no non-corporate interests (NCIs) of LLC 1 or LLC 2. The Acquiring
Person has executed an acquisition agreement pursuant to which it will acquire all of the NCls of several
intermediate LLCs that collectively hold 100% of the NCls of LLC 1 and 45% of the NCls of LLC 2. The acquisition
agreement also requires the Acquiring Party to acquire an additional 35% of the NCls of LLC 2 in 2024, more than
two years in the future. The acquisition agreement provides that should the then current provisions of the HSR
Act so require, the Acquiring Person’s future purchase of the additional 35% of the NCls of LLC 2 will be
contingent upon the parties filing on the date that is one year prior to the 2024 acquisition date appropriate HSR
Notification and Report Forms with respect to that aspect of the transaction and the expiration or termination
of the waiting period.

Holders of LLC 2 NCIls are entitled to share of LLC 2’s current profits and assets upon dissolution in
proportion to their percentage ownership of its NCls.

The aspect of the transaction for the Acquiring Person’s current, indirect acquisition of 100% of the NCls
of LLC 1 will confer control of LLC 1 upon the Acquiring Person and satisfies the lower of the size of transaction
threshold (i.e. $92 million) and both of the size of person thresholds. The acquisition agreement, therefore,
conditions the closing of the Acquiring Person’s acquisition of 100% of the NCls of LLC 1 upon the parties filing
appropriate HSR Notification and Report Forms with respect to that aspect of the transaction and the expiration
or termination of the waiting period.

Because the Acquiring Person’s current acquisition of 45% of the LLC 2 NCIs does not confer control of
LLC 2 upon the Acquiring Party, it is our opinion that such acquisition is not subject to the reporting
1


requirements of the Act irrespective of the Acquiring Person’s contingent commitment to the future acquisition
of an additional 35% of LLC 2’s NCls. Additionally, if the parties were to currently file HSR Notification and
Report Forms with respect to the both the Acquiring Person’s current acquisition of 45% of LLC 2’s NCls and the
contemplated 2024 acquisition of an additional 35% of LLC 2’s NCls , such filing and the expiration or
termination of the waiting period initiated by such filing would not be sufficient to permit the Acquiring Person’s
2024 acquisition of such additional 35% of LLC 2’s NCls because that acquisition would occur more than one year

following the expiration of the waiting period.

Could you confirm our conclusions as set forth in the immediately preceding paragraph?
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 816 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 816

  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
           provide death benefits for campus police officers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 28, 2019

 Mr. King of New York (for himself, Mr. Moulton, Mr. Neal, Mr. Lynch, 
 Mr. Bacon, Mr. Krishnamoorthi, Mr. Keating, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Clark of 
Massachusetts, Mr. Cohen, and Mr. Cole) introduced the following bill; 
          which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
           provide death benefits for campus police officers.

    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 ``Officer Sean Collier Campus Police 
Recognition Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. DEATH BENEFITS FOR CAMPUS POLICE OFFICERS.

    Section 1204 of part L of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10284) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (9) as 
        paragraphs (2) through (10), respectively;
            (2) by inserting the following before paragraph (2) (as so 
        redesignated):
            ``(1) `campus police officer' means a police officer--
                    ``(A) who is authorized to enforce the criminal 
                laws (including the authorization to make arrests); and
                    ``(B) who is employed by an institution of higher 
                education (as such term is defined in section 101 of 
                the Higher Education Act of 1965), including a police 
                or similar department operated by such institution;''; 
                and
            (3) in paragraph (10) (as so redesignated)--
                    (A) in subparagraph (C)(ii), by striking ``or'' at 
                the end;
                    (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at 
                the end and inserting ``; or'' ; and
                    (C) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the 
                following:
                    ``(E) a campus police officer.''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to a 
personal injury sustained in the line of duty by a campus police 
officer occurring on or after April 15, 2013.
                                 <all>
```
#### Marie M. WEST et al. v. STATE of Louisiana, Through STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUB. EDUCATION and State Board of Education.

No. 60877.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 11, 1977.

In re: Marie M. West, et vir, applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Writ refused.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-69616, 333-49027, 333-69618, and 333-89496 on Forms S-8 and Registration
Statement No. 333-13431 on Form S-3 of Speedway Motorsports, Inc. and
subsidiaries of our report dated February 11, 2003 (which report expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the
effects of the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142),
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Speedway Motorsports, Inc. for
the year ended December 31, 2002.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
-------------------------
Charlotte, North Carolina
March 18, 2003
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-60308

Summary Calendar

EFFORT ALEXANDER,

Plaintiff–Appellant,

versus

DESOTO COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI; CITY OF HORN LAKE, MISSISSIPPI,

Defendants–Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:14-CV-135

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing pro se, Effort Alexander challenges the dismissal, as barred 

 

* 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

October 30, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-60308 Document: 00513253320 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/30/2015
No. 15-60308

2

by the Mississippi one-year statute of limitations, of his action against the 

defendant governmental units for placing an allegedly unjust cloud on his 

property. In a short but sufficiently explanatory order, the district court determined that “Alexander has not alleged continual unlawful acts” but only 

ongoing injury. It is the acts, however, and not the injury, that triggered the 

running of limitations.

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 15-60308 Document: 00513253320 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/30/2015
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-28-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-05-2000
<CASH>                                           10118
<SECURITIES>                                      1939
<RECEIVABLES>                                      889
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     125889
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                144657
<PP&E>                                          420982
<DEPRECIATION>                                  198918
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  471945
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           164767
<BONDS>                                         159435
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      135596
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    471945
<SALES>                                         328426
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                328426
<CGS>                                           236608
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   236608
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               18067
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (28140)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (949)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (27191)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (27191)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
No. 00-792.

#### Elkins *v.*Pharmacy Corporation of America et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### MARLER HOLDING CO., Inc., a corporation, “Gus” Rubino, Sol Feldman and Robert Taylor, Appellants, v. RUTTGER HOTEL CORP., a corporation, Donald W. Ruttger, Max J. Ruttger and Rosie S. Ruttger, Appellees.

No. 69-187.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 12, 1970.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; Stewart F. LaMotte, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
Comment Info: ================= 

General Comment:Attn:

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590 

RE: ON THE MARK MEDIA, LLC dba. ON THE MARK MEDIA/ON THE MARK RENTALS

REQUEST AN EXEMPTION FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF 

FEDERAL REGULATIONS

SECTIONS 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), 

AND 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF DJI Phantom 2 UNMANNED 

AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND 

REFORM ACT OF 2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112-95) 

Jeffrey Markham

CEO

On The Mark Media 10812 Hubbard Way, San Jose, CA 95127

408-250-2444

jeff@otm-media.com
#### DORAL COUNTRY CLUB INC., Petitioner, v. Mary B. SCHMIDT, (Widow), Paul Schmidt (Minor Son) and The Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents.

No. 38850.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 24, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 27, 1969.

Jerry V. Wilkey, Miami, for petitioner.

Kaplan, Dorsey, Sicking & Rodenberg, Miami, and Jack S. Liebmann, Miami Beach, for Frank Schmidt, Deceased, and others.

Edward Schroll, Miami, for Mary B. Schmidt, Widow of Frank Schmidt.

Fred A. Resnick, Davie, for Paul Schmidt (Minor Son).

*839Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for Florida Industrial Commission.

PER CURIAM.

By petition for a writ of certiorari we have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission hearing date June 27, 1969.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 32 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law.

The petition is therefore denied.

The petitions for attorneys’ fees filed by respondents Mary and Frank Schmidt are each granted in the amount of $250.00.

ERVIN, C. J., and THORNAL, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ„ concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. WILLIAM NEAL WILLARD, JR., Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 128 WAL 2015 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 21st day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  OF FOREST OIL CORPORATION  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and in connection with the accompanying report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2008 that is being filed concurrently with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned officer of Forest Oil Corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies
that:



|            |  | /S/  H. CRAIG CLARK                                 
|----------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|May 8, 2008 |  | H. Craig Clark
President and Chief Executive Officer

---



QuickLinks
#### Linda BELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. P-468.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Feb. 1, 1972.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, and John W. Watson, III, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

*77PER CURIAM.

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

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392]
 ACTION: Notice of application.
 DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before August 20, 2018.
 ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R. In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on March 13, 2018, American Radiolabeled Chem, 101 Arc Drive, St. Louis, MO 63146 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances: Controlled substance
Drug code
ScheduleGamma Hydroxybutyric Acid
2010
IIbogaine
7260
ILysergic acid diethylamide
7315
ITetrahydrocannabinols
7370
IDimethyltryptamine
7435
I1-[1-(2-Thienyl)cyclohexyl]piperidine
7470
IDihydromorphine
9145
IHeroin
9200
INormorphine
9313
IAmphetamine
1100
IIMethamphetamine
1105
IIAmobarbital
2125
IIPhencyclidine
7471
IIPhenylacetone
8501
IICocaine
9041
IICodeine
9050
IIDihydrocodeine
9120
IIOxycodone
9143
IIHydromorphone
9150
IIEcgonine
9180
IIHydrocodone
9193
IIMeperidine
9230
IIMetazocine
9240
IIMethadone
9250
IIDextropropoxyphene, bulk (non-dosage forms)
9273
IIMorphine
9300
IIOripavine
9330
IIThebaine
9333
IIOxymorphone
9652
IIPhenazocine
9715
IICarfentanil
9743
IIFentanyl
9801
II
 The company plans to manufacture small quantities of the above-listed controlled substances as radiolabeled compounds for biochemical research. Dated: June 12, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2018-13231 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
July 9 , 2015

Mr. D rew Townsend

501 Goodlette Suite B 306

Naples, FL 34102

Dear Mr. Townsend :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Re gulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your July 1 st 2015 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 2675 ), but we are u nable to process your request any further. The information you sent does

no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request

any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the propose d effective date of the exemption.

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely

, /s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst

, Airmen and

Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL

,

Petitioner

v.

W ENDELL K. GRIMES

,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 2 920 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 145 DB 2022

Attorney Registration N o. 47102

( Philadelphia )

ORDER

PER CURIAM :

AND NOW , this 7 th day of December , 202 2 , upon consideration of the

Recommendation of the Three

- Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board, the Joint Petition

in Support of Discipline on Consent is granted, and W endell K. Grimes is suspended on

consent from the Bar of this Comm onwealth for a period of four years. Respondent shall

comply with all the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board.

See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

TIMOTHY MUNNERLYN,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D22-3032 

LT Case No. 2019-CF-000533-A 

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Decision filed August 1, 2023 

3.853 Appeal from Circuit Court

for Citrus County, 

Joel D. Fritton, Judge. 

Timothy Munnerlyn, Blountstown, pro se. 

No Appearance for Appellee

PER CURIAM. 

AFFIRMED. 

EDWARDS, C.J., MAKAR and SOUD, JJ., concur.