alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|   | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                          | Summit Hotel Properties, Inc.                                                                      |
|-------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                          |                                                                                               |
| Date:  May 16, 2011 | By:      /s/  Stuart J. Becker                             |
|                          | Stuart J. BeckerExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) |
# C_2015287EN.01000401.xml

| 1.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/4

---

Commission notice pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 287/05)

| Member State | France |
| --- | --- |
| Route concerned | Lorient (Lann-Bihoué) — Lyon (Saint-Exupéry) |
| Period of validity of the contract | From 2 March 2016 to 1 March 2020 |
| Deadline for submission of applications and tenders | Open procedure:
  3 November 2015 by 12.00 Paris time |
| Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained | Chambre de commerce et d’industrie du Morbihan |
| 21 quai des Indes |
| CS30362 |
| 56323 Lorient |
| FRANCE |
| Tel. +33 297024000 |
| Fax +33 297024093 |
| Email: dir.juridique@morbihan.cci.fr |

Member State

France

Route concerned

Lorient (Lann-Bihoué) — Lyon (Saint-Exupéry)

Period of validity of the contract

From 2 March 2016 to 1 March 2020

Deadline for submission of applications and tenders

Open procedure:

3 November 2015 by 12.00 Paris time

Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained

Chambre de commerce et d’industrie du Morbihan

21 quai des Indes

CS30362

56323 Lorient

FRANCE

Tel. +33 297024000

Fax +33 297024093

Email: dir.juridique@morbihan.cci.fr

---
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3374

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect to the treatment

of certain bargain sales.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 29, 1993

Mr. ZIMMER (for himself, Mr. SAXTON, and Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut)

submitted the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect

to the treatment of certain bargain sales.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Land Preservation Tax

5 Fairness Act of 1993’’.

6 SECTION 2. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN BARGAIN SALES.

7 (a) BASIS ALLOCATION RULES.—Subsection (b) of

8 section 1011 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relat9 ing to bargain sale to charitable organization) is amended

10 to read as follows:
2

HR 3374 IH

1 ‘‘(b) BARGAIN SALE TO CHARITABLE ORGANIZA2 TION.—

3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—If a deduction is allowable

4 under section 170 (relating to charitable contribu5 tions) by reason of a sale, then the adjusted basis

6 for determining gain from such a sale shall be that

7 portion of the adjusted basis which bears the same

8 ratio to the adjusted basis as the amount realized

9 bears to the fair market value of the property.

10 ‘‘(2) SPECIAL RULE FOR CERTAIN SALES OF

11 REAL PROPERTY.—If—

12 ‘‘(A) a deduction is allowable under section

13 170 by reason of any sale, and

14 ‘‘(B) such sale is a sale of real property (or

15 an interest therein) to a qualified organization

16 (as defined in section 170(h)),

17 paragraph (1) shall not apply and the entire ad18 justed basis of the property (or interest therein)

19 shall be taken into account in determining the

20 amount of gain from such sale. If the sale involves

21 an interest which is a restriction described in section

22 170(h)(2)(C), the entire adjusted basis of the prop23 erty to which the such restriction applies shall be

24 taken into account under the preceding sentences as

25 the adjusted basis of the interest.’’
3

HR 3374 IH

1 (b) DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE.—

2 Section 170 of such code is amended by redesignating sub3 section (m) as subsection (n) and by inserting after sub4 section (1) the following new subsection:

5 ‘‘(m) DETERMINATION OF VALUE OF CERTAIN RE6 STRICTIONS.—If any restriction described in subsection

7 (h)(2)(C) is sold to a qualified organization (as defined

8 in subsection (h)), for purposes of determining the amount

9 (if any) of the deduction allowable under this section with

10 respect to such sale, the fair market value of such restric11 tion shall be determined without regard to the amount

12 paid therefor even if such amount is determined in a com13 petitive fashion.’’

14 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

15 this section shall apply to sale after the date of the enact16 ment of this Act.

Æ
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3701

To deauthorize a portion of the project for navigation, Falmouth,

Massachusetts, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 22, 1993

Mr. STUDDS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Public Works and Transportation

A BILL

To deauthorize a portion of the project for navigation,

Falmouth, Massachusetts, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CHANNEL DEAUTHORIZATION, FALMOUTH,

4 MASSACHUSETTS.

5 (a) DEAUTHORIZATION.—The portions described in

6 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the project for navigation, Fal7 mouth, Massachusetts, authorized by section 101 of the

8 River and Harbor Act of 1948 (62 Stat. 1172), are not

9 authorized after the date of the enactment of this Act.
2

•HR 3701 IH

1 (1) The portion commencing at a point north

2 199286.37 east 844394.81 a line running north 73

3 degrees 09 minutes 24.6 seconds east 440.44 feet to

4 a point north 199413.99 east 844816.36, thence

5 turning and running north 43 degrees 09 minutes

6 34.5 seconds east 119.99 feet to a point north

7 199501.52 east 844898.44, thence turning and run8 ning south 66 degrees 52 minutes 04.4 seconds east

9 547.66 feet returning to a point north 199286.37

10 east 844394.81.

11 (2) The portion commencing at a point north

12 199647.42 east 845035.25 a line running north 43

13 degrees 09 minutes 35.0 seconds east 767.14 feet to

14 a point north 200207.01 east 845560.00, thence

15 turning and running north 11 degrees 04 minutes

16 24.3 seconds west 380.08 feet to a point north

17 200580.01 east 845487.00, thence turning and run18 ning north 22 degrees 05 minutes 50.8 seconds east

19 1332.36 feet to a point north 201814.50 east

20 845988.21, thence turning and running north 02 de21 grees 54 minutes 15.7 seconds east 15.0 feet to a

22 point north 201829.48 east 845988.97, thence turn23 ing and running south 23 degrees 36 minutes 31.9

24 seconds west 2381.38 feet returning to the point

25 north 199647.42 east 845035.25.
3

•HR 3701 IH

1 (b) REDESIGNATION.—The portion of the project re2 ferred to in subsection (a) upstream of a line designated

3 by the two points north 199463.18 east 844496.40 and

4 north 199350.36 east 844544.60 is redesignated as an

5 anchorage area.

Æ
1

Werner, Christopher

From: Werner, Christopher

Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 5:11 PM

To: aaron_l_szabo@omb.eop.gov

Cc: Lorang, Phil; Jones, Rhea; Beaver, Melinda; Marks, Matthew; Anderson, Lea; VanLare, 

Paula; Greenglass, Nora; Smith, Kristi; Palma, Elizabeth; Wood, Anna; Harnett, Bill

Subject: EPA responses to Interagency Comments

Attachments: Rx fire aspects from EPA March 11 2016 part 2 v2.docx

Categories: Regional Haze

Aaron, 

 

As discussed during today’s interagency call on EPA’s proposed revisions to the regional haze rule, attached please find 

document for interagency review. 

Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, 

Chris Werner 

US EPA – Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

Air Quality Policy Division 

(919) 541-5133 

werner.christopher@epa.gov
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2



                               CONSENT OF KPMG LLP



The Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Whitman Corporation and PepsiAmericas, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this joint proxy
statement/prospectus and in the Registration Statement of our report dated
February 1, 2000, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Whitman
Corporation and subsidiaries as of the end of fiscal years 1999 and 1998, and
the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity and cash
flows for each of the fiscal years 1999, 1998, and 1997, which report appears in
the fiscal 1999 annual report on Form 10-K of Whitman Corporation.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this joint proxy
statement/prospectus and in the Registration Statement of our reports dated
December 5, 1997, relating to the consolidated statements of income (loss),
shareholders' equity and cash flows of PepsiAmericas, Inc. (formerly known as
Pepsi-Cola Puerto Rico Bottling Company) and subsidiaries for the year
ended September 30, 1997 and the related financial statement schedule, which
reports appear in the 1999 annual report on Form 10-K.

We consent to the reference to our firm under the heading "Experts" in this
joint proxy statement/prospectus and in the Registration Statement.

/s/ KPMG LLP
---------------


Chicago, Illinois
September 20, 2000
#### Kip LINTHICUM, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-183.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 19, 1972.

Kip Linthicum, in pro per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and CHARLES CARROLL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of this appeal, and the appellant having filed his response thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida 

Opinion filed December 15, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D20-1477

Lower Tribunal Nos. EPC No. 20-0140-RA and PPS No. 189-2770

________________

Michael Andrew Moran,

Appellant,

vs.

Richard Corcoran, as Commissioner of Education,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the State of Florida, Education Practices Commission.

Tripp Scott, P.A., and Edward J. Pozzuoli, Stephanie D. Alexander and 

Thomas B. Sternberg (Fort Lauderdale), for appellant.

Bonnie Wilmot, Deputy General Counsel, for the Florida Department 

of Education (Tallahassee), for appellee.

Before LOGUE, HENDON and LOBREE, JJ. 

LOGUE, J.
2

Appellant challenges the severity of the penalty imposed upon him by 

the Education Practices Commission. The record shows that he did not 

dispute any of the facts alleged in the administrative complaint; he responded 

to the complaint by requesting an informal hearing which he elected to not 

attend; and the Commission adopted the uncontested findings of fact in the 

complaint and imposed a penalty within the authority of sections 

1012.795(1)(j) and 1012.796(7), Florida Statutes, even though the penalty 

exceeded the recommendation by the Department of Education’s attorney. 

Appellant asserts, however, that his due process rights were violated 

because he would have attended the informal hearing had he known how 

harshly some Commission members would characterize his communications 

which gave rise to the complaint filed against him. We find no support for this 

due process claim.

In these circumstances, whether or not we would have chosen so

severe a sanction, this Court is not at liberty to impose its own view of the 

appropriate penalty. See, e.g., Cabezas v. Corcoran, 293 So. 3d 602, 604 

(Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (affirming permanent revocation of educator’s certificate 

following informal hearing where penalty was authorized by statute); 

Gonzalez-Gomez v. Dep’t of Health, 107 So. 3d 1139, 1140–41 (Fla. 3d DCA 

2012) (affirming permanent revocation of doctor’s license where the doctor 
3

did not dispute any of the facts in the administrative complaint and requested 

an informal hearing before the Board of Medicine); Decola v. Castor, 519 So. 

2d 709, 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (“The EPC found appellant guilty based on 

the admitted facts stated in the complaint, and the penalty imposed was 

within the authority of section 231.28. Thus, this court is not authorized to 

review the penalty.”).

Affirmed.
Document Headings

                    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 Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

          - [CDC-2018-0028; Docket Number NIOSH-310]

# AGENCY:

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

# ACTION:

Notice of availability.

# SUMMARY:

                        NIOSH announces the availability of the final                         *National Occupational Research Agenda for Wholesale and Retail Trade.*

# DATES:

The final document was published August 17, 2018 on the CDC website.

# ADDRESSES:

                        The document may be obtained at the following link:                         *https://      ( print page 42654)    www.cdc.gov/​niosh/​nora/​councils/​wrt/​agenda.html*.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Emily Novicki, M.A., M.P.H, (                        *NORACoordinator@cdc.gov*), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mailstop E-20, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30329, phone (404) 498-2581 (not a toll free number).                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On April 24, 2018, NIOSH published a request for public review in the                     **Federal Register**                     [83 FR 17283] of the draft version of the                     *National Occupational Research Agenda for Wholesale and Retail Trade.*                     No comments were received.                

Dated: August 20, 2018.

Frank J. Hearl,

Chief of Staff, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2018-18168 Filed 8-22-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
#### David E. Kennedy, Inc. *v.*O’Brien et al., Appellant.

Argued November 1, 1934.

Before Trexler, P. J., Keller, CuisnsnxGHAM, Baldrige, Stadteeld, Parker and James, JJ.

*470
      *Raymond A. White, Jr.,*for appellants.

*Jos. A. Keough,*of *Levi & Mandel,*for appellee.

December 18, 1934:

Per Curiam,

The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Gable.
[No. D039073.

Fourth Dist., Div. One.

June 17, 2002.]

#### THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LOUIE F. MORA, Defendant and Appellant; In re LOUIE F. MORA on Habeas Corpus.

[No. D039527.

Fourth Dist., Div. One.

June 17, 2002.]

*398Counsel

Athena Shudde, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, and Robert M. Foster, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Opinion

HUFFMAN, J.

In 1995 in superior court case No. SF87558, a jury convicted Louie F. Mora of assault with a firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(2))1 while personally using a firearm (§ 12022.5) and inflicting great bodily injury (§ 12022.7), being a felon in possession of a firearm (§ 12021, subd. (a)), making a terrorist threat (§ 422), false imprisonment (§§ 236/ 237), assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), inflicting corporal injury on a spouse or cohabitant (§ 273.5), and dissuading a witness by force (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)). In superior court case No. SF90038 Mora entered a negotiated guilty plea to possessing marijuana for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11359). The court sentenced him to 14 years four months in prison: the four-year upper term for assault with a firearm enhanced five years for personal firearm use, with consecutive eight-month terms for being a felon in possession of a firearm and making a terrorist threat (one-third the middle term), one year for assault with a deadly weapon (one-third the middle term) enhanced one year four months for personally using a firearm (one-third the middle term), one year for dissuading a witness (one-third the middle term), and eight months for possessing marijuana for sale in case No. SF90038 (one-third the middle term). In June 2001, the Department of Corrections advised the trial court that section 1170.15 provides for a full consecutive three-year term for dissuading a witness. On July 3, 2001, the trial court amended the abstract of judgment, ex parte, to provide for a full three-year term for dissuading a witness.

In both the appeal and habeas corpus petition Mora contends amending the abstract of judgment in his absence was error and that increasing his *399sentence places him in double jeopardy. (See *People v. Mustafaa*(1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1305 [28 Cal.Rptr.2d 172].) The People agree that the trial court erred in resentencing him in his absence. *(People*v. *Arbee*(1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 351, 356 [192 Cal.Rptr. 13].) We remand for resentencing and choose not to consider the double jeopardy issue absent a full record of the proceedings on remand.

Mora’s February 2002 motion to vacate the judgment, treated as a petition for writ of habeas corpus, raises the same issues as the appeal. In light of our decision to remand for resentencing, the petition is dismissed as moot.

Disposition

The convictions are affirmed. The sentence is reversed and matter is remanded for resentencing in Mora’s presence.

Kremer, P. J., and O’Rourke, J., concurred.

1

All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
#### Hamilton C. FORMAN et al., Petitioners, v. Adrienne G. McDONALD, Respondent.

No. 40141.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 7, 1970.

Certiorari denied. 238 So.2d 131.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, CARLTON and BOYD, JJ., concur.

DREW, J., dissents.
Exhibit 10.2

 Exhibit 10.2
 AMENDMENT TO 
 CHANGE IN CONTROL PROTECTION AGREEMENT
 

 THIS AMENDMENT (the “Amendment”) to the CHANGE IN CONTOL PROTECTION AGREEMENT between ANITA WIMMER (“Executive”) and STANLEY FURNITURE COMPANY, INC., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), effective as of December 11, 2015 (the “Change in Control Protection Agreement”), shall be effective November 30, 2016. 
 

 WHEREAS, the Executive and the Company have the power to amend the Change in Control Protection Agreement and now wish to do so; 
 

 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual agreements herein contained, the parties agree as follows:
 
 
 1.         Section 1 of the Change in Control Protection Agreement is hereby amended to add the following at the end of the definition of “Base Salary Amount”: 
 For avoidance of doubt, any quarterly “make-whole” payment which Executive has received or is entitled to receive for calendar year 2017 pursuant to resolutions adopted by the Company’s Compensation and Benefits Committee as of the date hereof shall be treated as part of Executive’s “annual base salary” for calendar year 2017 for purposes of determining her “Base Salary Amount”. 
 2.         In all other respects, the Change in Control Protection Agreement is hereby ratified and confirmed.
 

 [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]
  

  



 

    
 

 

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employee and the Company have executed this Amendment as of the day and year above written.
 

  
  
  
  	 Stanley Furniture Company, Inc.
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	    
	 	   	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	
	 By: /s/Glenn Prillaman                                  	  	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Glenn Prillaman, Chief Executive Officer	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Anita Wimmer	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	/s/Anita W. Wimmer	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	
	 	Executive's Signature
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report of China Highlands Limited (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeremy Mork, Chief Executive and Financial  Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. {section} 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(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.



|Dated:  November 11, 2011
By  /s/ Jeremy Mork
-----------------------------
    Jeremy Mork
    Chief Executive and  Financial Officer
   (Principal Executive and Financial Officer)
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Attachment 4 

Public Notice 

Rule 323.1