alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 17560]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7109]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>13050 and <greek-i>13051]


Kentucky Disaster <greek-i>KY-00045

AGENCY: Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major 
disaster for Public Assistance Only for the Commonwealth of Kentucky 
(FEMA-4057-DR), dated 03/16/2012.
    Incident: Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Straight-line Winds, and 
Flooding.
    Incident Period: 02/29/2012 through 03/03/2012.

DATES: Effective Date: 03/16/2012.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 05/15/2012.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/17/2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the President's major disaster declaration on 03/16/2012, Private Non-
Profit organizations that provide essential services of governmental 
nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above 
or other locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: Grant, Laurel, Lawrence, Magoffin, Martin, Menifee, 
Morgan.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Non-Profit Organizations With Credit Available Elsewhere...      3.125
  Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere      3.000
For Economic Injury:
  Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere      3.000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 13050C 
and for economic injury is 13051C.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2012-7109 Filed 3-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference inRegistration Statement No. 333-102221 on Form S-3 and in Registration Statement’s No.’s 333-23237, 333-41327, 333-62157 and 333-71892 of Radiant Systems, Inc. on Forms S-8 of our reports dated March 1, 2006, relating to thefinancial statements and financial statement schedule of Radiant Systems, Inc and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Radiant Systems, Inc forthe year ended December 31, 2005. 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

Atlanta, Georgia 

March 1, 2006
CERTIFICATION

Exhibit31.1

I, Anthony J.Bettencourt, certify that: 

1.          Ihave reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Verity, Inc.; 

2.          Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3.          Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report; 

4.          Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

(a) Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; 

(b) Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and 

(c) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5.          Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and 

(b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 13, 2004
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CURTIS TYRONE THOMAS, JR.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 266 MAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 17th day of October, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 28, 2019

No. 04-19-00427-CR, 04-19-00428-CR & 04-19-00429-CR

The STATE of Texas,

Appellant

v.

Raymond SOTO,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR9018, 2018CR9019, 2018CR9020

The Honorable Velia J. Meza, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellee’s attorney has filed a motion to withdraw stating he was retained to represent 

appellee at the trial court level; however, appellee does not have the financial resources to 

employ counsel on appeal. The motion is GRANTED. Since appellee may be indigent, this 

appeal is ABATED to the trial court to determine if appellate counsel must be appointed. See 

Duncan v. State, 653 S.W.2d 38, 40 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) (holding that appellate courts may 

abate appeals so that trial court can assure appellant has effective assistance of counsel). The 

trial court is ORDERED to determine if appellee is indigent and entitled to appointed counsel 

and to cause the trial court clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing an order 

documenting its ruling within one month from the date this order is signed. All other appellate 

deadlines are suspended pending further order of this court.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 28th day of October, 2019.

___________________________________

LUZ ESTRADA,

Chief Deputy Clerk
#### STATE ex rel. Michael LEWIS v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 88-KH-0091.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 12, 1988.

In re Lewis, Michael; applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “D”, Nos. 316337, 316338.

Granted and transferred to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeal for consideration.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                      10,643,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  330,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,973,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,414,000
<PP&E>                                       2,193,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               (922,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,905,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,649,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            46
<OTHER-SE>                                  84,600,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,905,000
<SALES>                                         26,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,000
<CGS>                                            5,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,359,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            18,875,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (11,000)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,980,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (26,145,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (26,145,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.60)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.60)


</TABLE>
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  I, James Weller, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Z Yachts, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Z Yachts, Inc.  Dated: May 21, 2007/s/ James G. WellerName:James G. WellerTitle:Chief Executive Officer
#### Timothy OVERMIER, et al. v. Navarre Scott TRAYLOR, Sr. and Elaine Miller Traylor.

No. 87-CC-0233.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 20, 1987.

In re Traylor, Navarre Scott Sr.; Tray-lor, Elaine Miller; applying for supervisory writ; Parish of Tangipahoa, 2lst Judicial District Court, Div. “E” No. 70532; to the *114Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CW/86/1660.

Denied.
Page 1 of 1 

Subject: Notice of Maryland Certification for Clean AIr- Act Section 11 O(a) (2), Ozone Infrastructure SIP 

r--~-GfeatedBy: iwilkinson@mde.state.md.us 

Scheduled Date: 

Creation Date: 11/14/2012307 PM 

L..----.:F""r-o...lm: Jim Wilkinson 

Recipient Action Date & Time Comment 

To: aILmirzakhalili@state.de.us (ali.mirzakhalili@state.de.us) Transferred 11/14/20123:10 PM 

CC: Angelo Bianca (abianca@mde.state.md.us) Third-Party 

Downloaded .' 

11/15/2012401 AM 

To:, bill.o'sLlllivan@dep.stale.nj.us 

(bill:o'sullivan@dep.state.nj.us) ;. Delivered 11/14/20123:14 PM 

CC: Brian Hug (bhug@mde.state.md.us) Third-Party 

Downloaded 11/15/20124:05 AM 

To: cecily.beall@dc.gov (cecily.beall@dc.gov) Transferred 11/14/20123:07 PM 

CC: Debbie Rabin (drabin@mde.stale.md.us) Read 11/15/201210:31 

AM 

CC Diane Franks (dfranks@mde.state.md.us) Third-Party 

Downloaded 11/15/2012413 AM 

CC: frankford.harold@epa.gov (frankford.harold@epa.gov) Transferred 11/14/2012308 PM 2.0.0 message 

relayed 

To: JohnABenedict@wv.gov (John.A.Benedicl@wv.gov) Transferred 11/14/2012307 PM 

CC: Mary Jane Rutkowski (mrutkowski@mde.state.md.us) Third-Party 

Downloaded 11115/20124:37 AM 

To: mgdowd@deq.virginia.gov (mgdowd@deq.virginia.gov) Transferred 11/14/2012307 PM 

CC: Molla Sarros (MSarros@mde.slale.md.us) Third-Party 

Downloaded 11/15/20124:38 AM 

CC: powers.marilyn@epa.gov (powers.marilyn@epa.gov) Transferred 11/14/20123:08 PM 2.0.0 message 

relayed 

To: ranbordner@state.pa.us (ranbordner@state.pa.us) Transferred 11/14/20123:08 PM 

CC: Roger Thunell (rthunell@mde.slale.md.us) Read 11/16/2012148 PM 

BC: Sally Frampton (sframpton@mde.stale.md.us) Third-Party 

Downloaded 11/15/20124:47 AM 

CC: Tad Aburn (gaburn@mde.state.md.us) Third-Party 

Downloaded 11/15/2012418 AM 

CC: Timothy Wallace (twallace@mde.slate.md.us) Third-Party 

Downloaded 11/15/2012452 AM 

file:///C:fUsers/jwilkinson/AppData/Localffemp/XPgrpwise/50A3B3BBMDEDOMpo2li,.. 11/30/2012
Exhibit 32.1



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 Annual Report of Zeros & Ones, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dana R. Waldman, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and Chief 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 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.



| |                         | 
| | ----------------------- | 
| |                         | 
| | /s/ Dana R. Waldman    
| | Dana R. Waldman        
| | Chief Executive Officer
| | April 2, 2007
50322.

#### NEAL v. INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA et al.

Clark, Judge.

This is the third appeal by this employee in contesting the validity of a modification of an award rendered in her favor for injuries sustained September 17, 1967. The previous opinions are reported as *Neal v. Ins. Co. of N. A.,*125 Ga. App. 152 (186 SE2d 552) and Neal *v. Howard Johnson, Inc.,*126 Ga. App. 560 (191 SE2d 350) cert. denied by Georgia Supreme Court and thereafter by United States Supreme Court (411 U. S. 971). The attack is made via an application for judgment in the superior court filed in compliance with Code § 114-711. Her present contention is that she is entitled to payment of the maximum amount under Code § 114-404 for total *855disability by virtue of a Form 16 agreement dated November 10, 1967 under which payments were first received by her. The insurer for the employer argues that the total due her is the maximum provided under Code Ann. § 114-405 for partial incapacity by reason of a subsequent award by a deputy director dated May 16, 1969. That later award was based upon a finding of partial incapacity effective August 8,1968, and was the result of a change of condition hearing. The deputy director’s award was made the award of the full board dated August 11,1969, after employee’s appeal. This latter award was the subject of the two previous opinions rendered by this court. The trial court’s judgment recognized the modification as being the later and therefore the final award. This ruling was correct.

Submitted March 10, 1975

Decided April 28, 1975

Rehearing denied May 16, 1975.

*Wade H. Leonard,*for appellant.

*McCamy, Minor, Phillips & Tuggle, J. T. Fordham,*for appellee.

A complicating factor was the employee’s refusal at one time to comply with a directive from the board requiring her to disclose interim earnings during which compensation payments had been suspended. Such procedure is within the board’s powers. See *Hopper v. Continental Ins. Co.,*121 Ga. App. 850, 851 (2) (176 SE2d 109).

The trial court’s judgment recites that the insurer had made tender on two occasions, the last in open court, of the correct amount owed under the award which had previously been affirmed by this court. These tenders were rejected. Accordingly, the employee is not entitled to interest after the date of the rejection. See *Washington Exchange Bank v. Smith,*23 Ga. App. 356 (98 SE 418); *Crocker v. Green,*54 Ga. 494.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Pannell, P. J., and Quillian, J., concur.*
Exhibit
      32.2





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**





In
      connection with the periodic report of ENERGENX, INC., a Nevada corporation
      (the
“Company”), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, RICK M. STREET, Chief
      Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
      the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and





(2)
      the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates
      and for the periods indicated.





This
      Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission.





Date:
      August 9, 2006





By: /s/
      Rick M. Street  Rick
      M.
      Street
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: __2011 NM-____089______-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
#### Thomas P. THORNTON, Petitioner, v. The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Respondent.

No. 85SC463.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

April 21, 1986.

David F. Vela, Colorado State Public Defender, Judy Fried, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for petitioner.

Norman S. Early, Jr., Dist. Atty., Brooke Wunnicke, Chief Appellate Deputy Dist. Atty., Donna Skinner Reed, Deputy Dist. Atty., Denver, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We granted certiorari to consider the decision of the court of appeals in *People v. Thornton,*712 P.2d 1095 (Colo.App.1985), which affirmed the conviction of the defendant, Thomas P. Thornton, on six counts of securities fraud. Subsequent to our order granting certiorari, the People, relying on our opinion in *People v. Riley,*708 P.2d 1359 (Colo.1985), have confessed error in this case. The People’s confession of error is based on the trial court’s instruction to the jury that good faith is not a defense to the charge of securities fraud. Although the defendant did not petition this court for certiorari on the propriety of the trial court’s instruction, the People, pointing out that at trial the defendant did raise an objection to the giving of the good faith instruction, urge us to reverse in the interests of justice.

We accept the People’s confession of error and accordingly reverse the judgment of conviction and remand the case to the court of appeals with directions to return the case to the district court for a new trial.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00067-CV 

CARON PHILLIPS APPELLANT

V.

HOME PATH FINANCIAL APPELLEE 

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

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 2015-000378-1

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

On March 3, 2015, and March 18, 2015, we notified appellant in 

accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c) that we would dismiss this 

appeal unless the $195 filing fee was paid. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). 

Appellant has not paid the $195 filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

Because appellant failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of 

appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court’s order of August 16, 2013,

2

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: WALKER, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ. 

DELIVERED: April 16, 2015

 

2See Supreme Court of Tex., Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil 

Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-district 

Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 13-9127 (Aug. 16, 2013) (listing fees in courts of 

appeals).
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2248 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2248

      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Bioallethrin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

Mrs. Feinstein introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Bioallethrin.

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

SECTION 1. BIOALLETHRIN.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.24.32 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Bioallethrin) is amended by 
striking ``12/31/2009'' and inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```