alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
steam_record - Fw: ELG ICR Extension Request 

 

-----Forwarded by Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US on 07/02/2010 09:08PM ----- 

To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

From: "Kustos, George P." <GPKUSTOS@southernco.com> 

Date: 07/02/2010 05:57PM 

Subject: ELG ICR Extension Request 

 Please find attached a request, from Alabama Power Company, 

for a 60 day extension to complete the ELG ICR. A hard-copy has 

also been sent by FedEx overnight. 

 If you have any questions, please call me. 

 Thank you. 

George P. Kustos, PE 

* 8-257-3274 Intracompany 

* 205-257-3274 Bell Phone 

* 205-257-4349 Fax 

* 205-288-1459 Linc Cell Phone 

* mailto: GPKUSTOS@southernco.com<mailto:GPKUSTOS@southernco.com> 

From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: <steam_record@erg.com>, <jordan.ronald@epa.gov>

Date: 7/2/2010 8:09 PM

Subject: Fw: ELG ICR Extension Request

Attachments: ELG Extension Request.PDF

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\TMedley\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C2E4774DO... 6/23/2011
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 76

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses

of investigations and studies by the Committee on Standards of Official

Conduct in the first session of the One Hundred Third Congress

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 4, 1993

Mr. MCDERMOTT submitted the following resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on House Administration

RESOLUTION

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House

for expenses of investigations and studies by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in the first session

of the One Hundred Third Congress

1 Resolved, That (a) for expenses of investigations and

2 studies by the Committee on Standards of Official Con3 duct (hereinafter in this resolution referred to as the

4 ‘‘Committee’’), including expenses for—

5 (1) procurement of consultant services under

6 section 202(i) of the Legislative Reorganization Act

7 of 1946; and
2

HRES 76 IH

1 (2) provision of assistance for members of pro2 fessional staff in obtaining specialized training under

3 section 202 (j) of such Act:

4 there shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the House

5 not more than $350,000.

6 (b) Not more than $200,000 of the amount specified

7 in subsection (a) may be used for consultant services re8 ferred to in paragraph (1) of such subsection and not more

9 than $5,000 of such amount may be used for specialized

10 training referred to in paragraph (2) of such subsection.

11 SEC. 2. Payments under this resolution shall be made

12 on vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the

13 Chairman of the Committee, and approved by the Commit14 tee on House Administration.

15 SEC. 3. Amounts shall be available under this resolu16 tion for investigations and studies carried out during the

17 period beginning at noon on January 3, 1993, and ending

18 immediately before noon on January 3, 1994.

19 SEC. 4. Amounts made available under this resolution

20 shall be expended in accordance with regulations pre21 scribed by the Committee on House Administration.

Æ
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 249

Electing Representative Montgomery to act as Speaker pro tempore.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 13, 1993

Mr. DERRICK submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Electing Representative Montgomery to act as Speaker pro

tempore.

1 Resolved, That the Honorable G.V. (Sonny) Mont2 gomery, a Representative from the State of Mississippi,

3 be, and he is hereby, elected Speaker pro tempore during

4 any absence of the Speaker, such authority to continue

5 not later than September 15, 1993.

6 Resolved, That the President and the Senate be noti7 fied by the Clerk of the election of the Honorable G.V.

8 (Sonny) Montgomery as Speaker pro tempore during the

9 absence of the Speaker.

Æ
No. 11562.

#### The State, ex rel. Eagle, et al. *v.*Mills et al., Deputy State Supervisors of Elections, et al.

Decided October 21, 1908.

In Mandamus.

*Mr. D. J. Ryan*and *Mr. George H. Jones,*for plaintiffs.

*Mr. E. J. Jones*and *Mr. R. M. Switzer,*for defendants.

By the court.

Writ of mandamus not allowed.

Price, C. J., Shauck, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.
# 1235-/5 ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA # 14-14-00152-CR STYLE: David Dean Harris v The State ofTexas COA DISPOSITION: Affirmed DATE: August 20, 2015 Publish: Yes 

### OFFENSE: Aggravated Sexual Assault COUNTY: Harris ,th 

### TRIAL COURT: 180"' District Court TC CASE #: 1340544

IN THE COURTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS
STYLE: David Dean Harris v The State ofTexas CCA#

# APPELLANT"^ Petition CCADisposition: 

# iiaswr FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: 

# DATE: Hi vr JUDGE: 

## \LU4M^ DATE: _ JUDGE:. SIGNED: PUBLISH: PC: DNP:

FOR REHEARING IN CCA IS: 

### JUDGE: MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 7

Fixing the daily hour of meeting for the 103d Congress.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. MOAKLEY submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Fixing the daily hour of meeting for the 103d Congress.

Resolved, That unless otherwise ordered, the hour of

meeting of the House shall be noon on Mondays and Tuesdays; 2 o’clock post meridiem on Wednesdays; 11 o’clock ante

meridiem on all other days of the week up to and including

May 14, 1993; and that from May 15, 1993, until the end

of the first session, the hour of daily meeting of the House

shall be noon on Mondays and Tuesdays and 10 o’clock ante

meridiem on all other days of the week.

Æ
#### Earl PINKNEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-929.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 7, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-40535 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JESUS OCEGUERA-CALDERON, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-97-CR-414-1

- - - - - - - - - - April 19, 1999 Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Jesus Oceguera-Calderon has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Oceguera has not responded to this motion. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
# C_2021349EN.01002301.xml

| 30.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 349/23 |
| --------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | -------- |

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italy) lodged on 18 January 2021 — Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) v Ryanair DAC (Case C-380/21) (2021/C 349/29) Language of the case: Italian Referring court Corte Suprema di Cassazione Parties to the main proceedings Appellant: Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) Respondent: Ryanair DAC Question referred Can the concept of a person ‘employed principally in the territory of the Member State in which he resides’ contained in Article 14(2)(a)(ii) [of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71, ( 1 ) as amended] be interpreted in the same way as that which (concerning judicial cooperation in civil matters, jurisdiction and individual contracts of employment (Regulation (EC) No 44/2001) ( 2 )) Article 19(2)(a) [of the latter Regulation] defines as the ‘place where the employee habitually carries out his work’, including in the aviation and airline crew sector (Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91), ( 3 ) as expressed in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union referred to in the grounds? ( 1 )  Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2). ( 2 )  Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1). ( 3 )  Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 of 16 December 1991 on the harmonization of technical requirements and administrative procedures in the field of civil aviation (OJ 1991 L 373, p. 4).

---
#### K. W. OSBORNE and Celeste Osborne, Appellants, v. Charles S. PETTYJOHN d/b/a Associated Realty Services and Wilbur Strickland, Appellees.

No. 70-345.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 8, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Langley vs. Barkman.

An appeal will not lie from an order of a justice of the peace, under *sec.*26, *chap.*66, *Gould’s Dig.,*in reference to estrays.

*Ajypeal from Glarh Ci/reuit Court.*

Hon. LeN B. GreeN, Circuit Judge.

GarlaND & KaNdolph, for Langley.

ElaNAgiN, contra.

Mr. Justice Fairohild

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Barkman took up a stray colt which Langley claimed, and he established his claim to the satisfaction of a justice of the peace, under *section*25, *chap.*66, *Gould's Dig.;*and the justice made the order provided for in the 26th section, requiring -Barkman to give the colt up to Langley, upon his paying all legal costs, and all further costs” Barkman was ordered to pay. Bark-man appealed to the circuit court. That court refused to take jurisdiction of the ownership of the colt, but tried the other branch of the case, and adjudged Langley to pay four dollars and twenty cents to Barkman for keeping the- colt. "With this Langley was dissatisfied, and appealed to this court; while Bark-man prosecutes his appeal because the circuit court would not try the right of the colt. Langley moved, in the circuit court, to dismiss the appeal because the court had no jurisdiction of the subject matter of the controversy, which the court overruled.

The court should have sustained the motion. The proceed*294ing before the Justice was not appealable. The only object of the statute is to enable the taker up of a stray animal to restore it to its owner, and obtain indemnity against the bond given to the county — the right of the animal is not determined; the taker up may refuse to obey the order of the justice, if he will, and exjJose himself to an action of detinue or trover, in which the right of property may be tried, *(section,*29 *of Statute,)*or to replevin. *Davis vs. Culbert, 17 Ark.*85 ; *Phelan vs. Bonham,*4 *Eng.*389.

The circuit court had no jurisdiction of either branch of the case, and its judgment is reversed, with direction to dismiss the case, for want of jurisdiction.
#### STATE ex rel. Richard C. DAVIS v. Ben F. OVERTON, Judge.

No. 38640.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 222 So.2d 811.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PATRINA HARRISON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

WHOLE FOODS MARKET, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 20-17446 

D.C. No. 4:20-cv-04867-JSW 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Jeffrey S. White, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 19, 2021**

Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Patrina Harrison appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing 

with prejudice her action alleging various federal and state law claims arising from 

various incidents while shopping. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 

We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Harrison’s request for oral 

argument, set forth in the opening brief, is denied.

FILED

JUL 22 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 20-17446 

Procedure 12(b)(6). L.A. Lakers, Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 869 F.3d 795, 800 (9th Cir. 

2017). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court dismissed Harrison’s 42 U.S.C. § 1981 claim for failure to 

state a claim without explanation. However, Harrison alleged that she was denied 

the opportunity to contract because she is African American, in contrast to 

similarly situated white customers. These allegations are sufficient to state a claim 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 for intentional discrimination. See Lindsey v. SLT L.A., 

LLC, 447 F.3d 1138, 1145 (9th Cir. 2006) (setting forth elements of a 42 U.S.C. §

1981 claim in a non-employment context). We vacate the judgment and remand 

for further proceedings on this claim.

The district court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over 

Harrison’s state law claims after dismissing her federal claims. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1367(c)(3). Because we vacate the dismissal on one of Harrison’s federal claims, 

we remand for the district court to reconsider whether it will exercise supplemental 

jurisdiction over Harrison’s state law claims. See Fang v. United States, 140 F.3d 

1238, 1243-44 (9th Cir. 1998).

In her opening brief, Harrison fails to address the dismissal of her remaining 

claims and has therefore waived her challenge to the district court’s order

regarding those claims. See Indep. Towers of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 

929 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[W]e will not consider any claims that were not actually 
3 20-17446 

argued in appellant’s opening brief.”); Acosta-Huerta v. Estelle, 7 F.3d 139, 144 

(9th Cir. 1993) (issues not supported by argument in pro se appellant’s opening 

brief are waived. 

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal. 

AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, and REMANDED.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 71 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                  House Calendar No. 10

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. RES. 71

                          [Report No. 103-13]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Relating to the consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 
     1) to grant family and temporary medical leave under certain 
                             circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            February 4, 1993

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                                  House Calendar No. 10
103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 71

                          [Report No. 103-13]

Relating to the consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 
     1) to grant family and temporary medical leave under certain 
                             circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 1993

    Mr. Gordon, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Relating to the consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 
     1) to grant family and temporary medical leave under certain 
                             circumstances.

    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution the bill (H.R. 
1) to grant family and temporary medical leave under certain 
circumstances be, and the same is hereby, taken from the Speaker's 
table to the end that the Senate amendment thereto be, and the same is 
hereby, agreed to.
```
<PAGE>
                                                                EXHIBIT 23.1(b)


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Forms S-8 No. 33-99070 and 333-64422 pertaining to the Chicago Miniature Lamp,
Inc. 1995 Incentive and Non-Statutory Stock Option Plan and Form S-3 No.
333-63028) of our report dated January 31, 2001, with respect to the financial
statements of Chicago Miniature Lamp (Canada), Inc. included in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) of SLI, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000.


/s/ HARDS PEARSON
---------------------------

Barrie, Ontario, Canada
Chartered Accountants
April 11, 2002
#### Anthony C. KALLAS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 44721.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 13, 1974.

Certiorari denied. 284 So.2d 421.

ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0037

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

DALE STEVEN MARTELL,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until October 14, 2021, to 

prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 7 2021

09/07/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0037
INDEX TO EXHIBITS


    15.1 Letter of Independent Accountants regarding Awareness
         of Incorporation by Reference.

    27.1 Financial Data Schedule.  (Exhibit 27.1 is being
         submitted as an exhibit only in the electronic format
         of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q being submitted
         to the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Exhibit
         27.1 shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section
         11 of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 18 of the
         Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or Section 323 of the
         Trust Indenture Act, or otherwise be subject to the
         liabilities of such sections, nor shall it be deemed a
         part of any registration statement to which it
         relates.)
#### George R. PRICE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-387.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 5, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# Official Journal C 171/30 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 171 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6030 May 2017 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 171

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6030 May 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 171/01 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 April 2017 to 30 April 2017(Published pursuant to Article 13 or 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) | 1 |
| 2017/C 171/02 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 April 2017 to 30 April 2017(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC) | 11 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2017/C 171/01

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 April 2017 to 30 April 2017(Published pursuant to Article 13 or 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

1

2017/C 171/02

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 April 2017 to 30 April 2017(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

11

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit No. 32.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) UNDER THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Gerber Scientific, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that, on the date hereof:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended January 31, 2005 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated:  March 10, 2005



| | /s/  Jay Zager                    | 
| | --------------------------------- | 
| | Jay Zager
Chief Financial Officer | 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.  This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to liability under that section.  This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act except to the extent this Exhibit 32 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                 EXHIBIT 23.1(A)
 
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-99070) pertaining to the Chicago Miniature Lamp, Inc. 1995
Incentive and Non-Statutory Stock Option Plan of our report dated January 29,
1999, except for the 1998 stock split as described in Note 2, as to which the
date is February 11, 1998 with respect to the consolidated financial statements
and schedule of Chicago Miniature Lamp, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended January 3, 1999.
 
Ernst & Young LLP
Chicago, Illinois
March 25, 1999
 
                                       65
#### WALGREEN CO., a corporation, Appellant, v. Frank SCHAUERMAN and Ruth Schauerman, Appellees.

No. 774.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 12, 1967.

Larry Klein, of Miller, Cone, Owen, Wagner & Nugent, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Thomas J. Yeager, of Nason & Gildan, West Palm Beach, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant, Walgreen Co., appeals judgment for the plaintiffs, Frank Schauer-man and Ruth Schauerman, entered upon verdict of the jury in a trip and fall accident.

A careful consideration of the record on appeal, the briefs and oral argument of counsel for the parties establishes a factual situation that was properly submitted to the ■ jury. Under such circumstances this court must sustain the verdict and judgment.

Affirmed.

ANDREWS and CROSS, JJ., and WEISSING, LOUIS, Associate Judge, concur.