alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali C 27A/27 t

| | ISSN 1977-0987 |
| --- | --- |
| Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali
  tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 27A |
| | |
| Edizzjoni bil-Malti | Informazzjoni u Avviżi | Volum 5827ta' Jannar 2015 |

ISSN 1977-0987

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali

tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 27A

Edizzjoni bil-Malti

Informazzjoni u Avviżi

Volum 5827ta' Jannar 2015

---

| Avviż Nru | Werrej | Paġna |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Rettifika |
| 2015/C 027A/01 | Rettifika tas-Sejħa għal espressjoni ta’ interess – Aġenti kuntrattwali amministraturi-riċerkaturi (grupp ta’ funzjoni IV) fil-qasam tar-riċerka parlamentari — (ĠU C 55 A, 26.2.2014 ) | 1 |

Avviż Nru

Werrej

Paġna

Rettifika

2015/C 027A/01

Rettifika tas-Sejħa għal espressjoni ta’ interess – Aġenti kuntrattwali amministraturi-riċerkaturi (grupp ta’ funzjoni IV) fil-qasam tar-riċerka parlamentari — (ĠU C 55 A, 26.2.2014 )

(ĠU C 55 A, 26.2.2014 )

1

---

| MT | |
| --- | --- |

MT

---

Rettifika

| 27.1.2015 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | CA 27/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2015

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

CA 27/1

---

Rettifika tas-Sejħa għal espressjoni ta’ interess – Aġenti kuntrattwali amministraturi-riċerkaturi (grupp ta’ funzjoni IV) fil-qasam tar-riċerka parlamentari

(Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea
  C 55 A tas-26 ta’ Frar 2014
  )

(2015/C 027 A/01)

F’paġna 4, Titolu VIII, l-aħħar sentenza:

Minflok:

“Il-kuntratt jiġi stabbilit skont l-Artikoli 3(b), 84 u 85 tal-Kundizzjonijiet tal-Impjieg.”,

Aqra:

“Il-kuntratt jiġi stabbilit skont l-Artikoli 3(b), 84 u 88 tal-Kundizzjonijiet tal-Impjieg.”.

---
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 Report of Strateco Resources Inc. (the Company) on Form 10K-SB for the period ending December 31, 2004, which contains the Companys financial statements unaudited for the year ended December 31, 2004 and audited for the year ended 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I Guy Hébert, President and Chief Executive 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:



(1)

the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of 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 results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Guy Hébert

__________________

Guy Hébert

President and Chief Executive Officer



March 17, 2005





---
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 15, 2018.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, November 15, 2018

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A19A0394. IN RE ESTATE OF CHARLES ANTHONY MOORE.

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW 

THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.
Order filed December 13, 2011

.

In The


## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________
NO. 14

- 11

- 00401

- CV

____________

SHARYON GATHE , Appellant

V.

JOSEPH C. GATHE, JR. , Appellee

On Appeal from the 308th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2006

- 69829



### O R D E R

Appellant = s brief was due November 29, 2011

. No brief or motion for extension of time

has been filed. Unless appellant submits a brief, and a motion reasonably explaining why the brief was
late, to the clerk of this court on or before January 12, 2012 , the court will dismiss the appeal
for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

vs. Case No.:

MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

Comes now , applicant herein, and

moves this Court to grant admission to the United States District Court for the Western District of

Texas pro hac vice to represent in this case, and

would respectfully show the Court as follows: 

1. Applicant is an attorney and a member of the law firm (or practices under the name of) 

 with offices at: 

Mailing address: 

City, State, Zip Code: 

Telephone: Facsimile: 

2. Since , Applicant has been and presently is a

member of and in good standing with the Bar of the State of . 

Applicant's bar license number is .

3. Applicant has been admitted to practice before the following courts:

Court: Admission date:

 

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC

6:20-cv-00571-ADA

GOOGLE LLC

Tharan Gregory Lanier

Google LLC

Jones Day

1755 Embarcadero Road

Palo Alto, CA 94303

(650) 739-3939 (650) 739-3900

December 7, 1988

California

138784

USDC Northern District of California December 16, 1988

USDC Eastern District of Texas March 2, 2005

US Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit April 28, 2015

Case 6:20-cv-00571-ADA Document 17 Filed 09/10/20 Page 1 of 4
4. Applicant is presently a member in good standing of the bars of the courts listed above,

except as provided below (list any court named in the preceding paragraph before which

Applicant is no longer admitted to practice):

5. I have have not previously applied to Appear Pro Hac Vice in this district

court in Case[s]:

Number: on the day of , .

Number: on the day of , . 

Number: on the day of , . 

6. Applicant has never been subject to grievance proceedings or involuntary removal

proceedings while a member of the bar of any state or federal court, except as

provided:

7. Applicant has not been charged, arrested, or convicted of a criminal offense or offenses,

except as provided below (omit minor traffic offenses):

8. Applicant has read and is familiar with the Local Rules of the Western District of Texas

and will comply with the standards of practice set out therein.

6:20-cv-00100

6:20-cv-00089

9 July 2020

9 July 2020

6:20-cv-00095 9 July 2020

Case 6:20-cv-00571-ADA Document 17 Filed 09/10/20 Page 2 of 4
Case 6:20-cv-00571-ADA Document 17 Filed 09/10/20 Page 3 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

YV &DVH1R

ORDER

%(,75(0(0%(5('RQWKLVGD\WKHUHZDVSUHVHQWHGWRWKH&RXUWWKH0RWLRQIRU

$GPLVVLRQ3UR+DF9LFHILOHGE\FRXQVHOIRU

DQGWKH&RXUWKDYLQJUHYLHZHGWKHPRWLRQHQWHUV

WKHIROORZLQJRUGHU

,7,625'(5('WKDWWKH0RWLRQIRU$GPLVVLRQ3UR+DF9LFHLV*5$17('DQG

PD\DSSHDURQEHKDOIRI

LQWKHDERYHFDVH

,7,6)857+(525'(5('WKDWLIKHVKH

KDVQRWDOUHDG\GRQHVRVKDOOLPPHGLDWHO\WHQGHUWKHDPRXQWRIPDGHSD\DEOHWRClerk, U.S.

District CourtLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWK/RFDO&RXUW5XOH$7OI

6,*1('WKLVWKHGD\RI



WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC

6:20-cv-00571-ADA

GOOGLE LLC

Tharan Gregory Lanier

Google LLC

Tharan Gregory Lanier Google LLC

Tharan Gregory Lanier

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00571-ADA Document 17 Filed 09/10/20 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit 10.13


 


SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT


 


	To:	The	Board of Directors of Larkspur Health Acquisition Corp.



 


The undersigned hereby subscribes for 9,584 shares
of Class B common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (the “Shares”) of Larkspur Health Acquisition Corp, a Delaware
corporation (the “Company”). In consideration for the issue of the Shares, the undersigned hereby agrees and undertakes
to pay $111 to the Company.


 


The undersigned agrees to take the Shares subject
to the Certificate of Incorporation of the Company and authorizes you to enter the following name and address in the stockholder ledger
of the Company:


 


	 	Name:	Gregory Skalicky	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Address:	809 Plymouth Road	 
	 	 	Lower Gwynedd, PA 19002	 



 


	/s/ Gregory Skalicky	 
	Gregory Skalicky
	 
	 	 
	Dated:	May 6, 2021	 
	 	 
	Accepted:	 
	 	 
	Larkspur Health Acquisition Corp.	 
	 	 
	Signed:	/s/ Daniel J. O’Connor	 
	Name:	Daniel J. O’Connor	 
	Title:	Chairman; Chief Executive Officer	 
	 	 	 
	Dated:	May 6, 2021
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

AHMED ALRWENI, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

v. § 1:20-CV-641-RP

§

ACCENTURE FLEX LLC, §

§

Defendant. §

ORDER

On June 30, 2020, Plaintiff Ahmed Alrweni (“Plaintiff”) dismissed all claims in this case 

without prejudice. (Dkt. 6). Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) allows a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss an action 

without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves an answer or a 

motion for summary judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Defendant Accenture Flex LLC has 

not served an answer or motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s notice is therefore “selfeffectuating and terminates the case in and of itself; no order or other action of the district court is 

required.” In re Amerijet Int’l, Inc., 785 F.3d 967, 973 (5th Cir. 2015), as revised (May 15, 2015). 

As nothing remains to resolve, IT IS ORDERED that the case is CLOSED. 

 SIGNED on July 1, 2020.

ROBERT PITMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00641-RP Document 7 Filed 07/01/20 Page 1 of 1
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Exhibit 32.2


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 The Stephan Co. (the "Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
David Spiegel, 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 results of
operations of the Company.



/s/ David A. Spiegel
__________________________________
David A. Spiegel
Chief Financial Officer
August 17, 2004
1 The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-1793

___________ Robert Terrence Jackson, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Southern District of Iowa. * State of Iowa, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: December 12, 2005 Filed: December 16, 2005

___________ Before BYE, BEAM, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Robert Terrence Jackson appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal of his habeas petition. We affirm.
Jackson placed his petition in the pris on mail system on October 19, 2003, and it was filed with the district court on October 28, 2003. Jackson’s “maximum discharge date” from supervised release was October 30, 2003. The district court, in-2- review of Jackson’s habeas petition, found Jackson was discharged from his term of supervised release on September 30, 2003.
Federal jurisdiction exists over petitions for habeas re lief only when such relief is sought by persons “in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). A federal district court is without jurisdiction to address the merits of a section 2254 petition where the habeas petitioner – who has served his state sentence and has been discharged from supervised release – is no longer “in custody” for his state conviction. Charlton v. Morris , 53 F.3d 929, 929 (8th Cir. 1995). Upon finding Jackson was discharged from supervised release prior to the filing of his habeas petition, the district court dismissed the petition. This appeal followed.
In habeas cases, we review the district court’s findings of fact for clear error and its legal conclusions denovo. Reagan v. Norris , 365 F.3d 616, 621 (8th Cir. 2004). “A district court’s choice betweentwo permissible views of evidence cannot be clearly erroneous.” Estate of Davis v. Delo , 115 F.3d 1388, 1393-94 (8th Cir. 1997).
The district court based its finding J ackson was discharged from supervised release on September 30, 2003, based upon a September 30, 2003, entry by Jackson’s parole officer which notes the officer in formed Jackson he was discharged from parole, the file was purged, and the case closed. The entry also indicates the officer had not received Jackson’s discharge papers as of September 30, 2003.
Jackson does not challenge the accuracy or authenticity of the case note entry. Instead, he asserts he was not discharged until he signed th e discharge papers. We do not find this argument compelling. Jacks on was never informed his discharge from-3- parole was dependent upon signing the discharge papers . Accordingly, we conclude the district court’s finding Jackson was discharged from supervised release on September 30, 2003, is not cl early erroneous. As such, the district court correctly determined it did not have jurisdiction to en tertain the habeas petition. We therefore affirm the district court’s dismissal of Jackson’s habeas petition.

______________________________
Take notice that on January 28, 2000, TransColorado Gas Transmission Company (TransColorado) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, Fifth Revised Sheet No. 20, with an effective date of February 1, 2000.

TransColorado states the filing is being made in compliance with the Commission's January 14, 2000, Order on Uncontested Settlement in Docket Nos. RP99-106-000 and -004 (the January 14 order). In the January 14 order, the Commission accepted the Interim Rates reflected on Sheet No. 20 to be effective February 1, 2000, as provided by Section II.A.6.b of the November 4, 1999, settlement that states Interim Rates will “be in effect, subject to refund under § III.F.1 below, as maximum filed rates from the first day of the month following the date the Settlement is approved by the Commission until February 1, 2001.”

TransColorado states that a copy of this filing has been served upon parties to the proceeding TransColorado's customers, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission and the New Mexico Public Regulatory Commission.

Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://ww.fer.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-2660  Filed 2-4-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2693 

To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report to Congress 

on security screening by the Transportation Security Administration of 

veterans and other passengers with amputations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 16, 2013 

Mr. COOK (for himself, Mr. RUNYAN, and Mr. O’ROURKE) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit 

a report to Congress on security screening by the Transportation Security Administration of veterans and other 

passengers with amputations. 

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 ‘‘Screening Amputees 

5 and Veterans with Efficiency and Dignity Act’’ or the 

6 ‘‘Save Dignity Act’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 2693 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPORT ON TSA SCREENING OF VETERANS AND 

2 OTHER PASSENGERS WITH PROSTHESES. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Secu4 rity shall submit a report to Congress by not later than 

5 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act on 

6 security screening by the Transportation Security Admin7 istration of veterans and other passengers with amputa8 tions, with or without prosthesis. 

9 (b) CONTENTS.—The report shall include analysis 

10 of— 

11 (1) the disparities that exist between airports in 

12 the screening of such passengers; 

13 (2) identification of the airports at which the 

14 Administration uses procedures and methods for 

15 such screening that are efficient, safe, timely, and 

16 respectful of such passengers, and airports at which 

17 the Administration does not use such procedures 

18 and methods; and 

19 (3) description of actions that will be taken by 

20 the Administration to implement such procedures 

21 and methods at all airports at which the Administra22 tion performs security screening of passengers. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Kesselman
      & Kesselman
              Certified
      Public Accountants
              Trade
      Tower, 25 Hamered Street
              Tel
      Aviv 68125 Israel
              P.O
      Box 452 Tel Aviv 61003
              Telephone
      +972-3-7954555
              Facsimile
      +972-3-7954556








CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM






We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated November 29, 2010
relating to the financial statements of Oramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s which
appears in the Annual Report on Form 10K for the year ended August 31, 2010, in
the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (333-164288).














/s/
Kesselman & Kesselman,





Tel Aviv,
Israel


November
29, 2010
#### MURRAY v. STATE.

No. 25929.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 25, 1952.

No attorney .for appellant of record on ■appeal.

George P. Blackburn, State’s* Atty., Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a conviction for driving while intoxicated, with the penalty of 30 days in the county jail.

The state has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal because the bond is not approved by the judge presiding. Examination of the record shows this to be the condition. The motion is sustained and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 199 (Friday, October 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26368]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Importer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Registration

    By Notice dated July 11, 2000, and published in the Federal 
Register on August 1, 2000, (65 FR 46951), Chiragene, Inc., 7 Powder 
Horn Drive, Warren, New Jersey 07059, made application by renewal to 
the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as an 
importer of phenylacetone (8501), a basic class of controlled substance 
listed in Schedule II.
    The firm plans to import the phenylacetone to manufacture 
amphetamine.
    No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered 
the factors in Title 21, United States Code, Section 823(a) and 
determined that the registration of Chiragene, Inc. to import 
phenylacetone is consistent with the public interest and with United 
States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or 
protocols in effect on May 1, 1971, at this time. DEA has investigated 
Chiragene, Inc. on a regular basis to ensure that the company's 
continued registration is consistent with the public interest. These 
investigations have included inspection and testing of the company's 
physical security systems, audits of the company's records, 
verification of the company's compliance with state and local laws, and 
a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant 
to Section 1008(a) of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act 
and in accordance with Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 
1301.34, the above firm is granted registration as an importer of the 
basic class of controlled substance listed above.

    Dated: October 4, 2000.
John H. King,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-26368 Filed 10-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-40343

Conference Calendar

 

KARL DEMETRIOUS HOLMES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

HERBERT SCOTT, Warden, Beto I

Unit, ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:96-CV-595

- - - - - - - - - -

December 9, 1997

Before BARKSDALE, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Karl Demetrious Holmes, Texas inmate #713188, challenges the

grant of summary judgment for the defendants in Holmes’ civil

rights suit by arguing that each defendant was liable. 

We have independently reviewed the arguments and the

appellate record. For essentially the same reasons upon which

the district court relied by adopting the magistrate judge’s
No. 97-40343

-2-

report, see Holmes v. Scott, No. 6:96cv595 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 28,

1997), we conclude that the district court did not err in its

summary-judgment determination.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 17, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 61318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26618]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL01-3-000]


Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc., Complainant v. PJM 
Interconnection, L.L.C., Respondent; Notice of Filing

October 11, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 6, 2000, Morgan Stanley Capital Group 
Inc. (MSCG), tendered for filing a complaint pursuant to Section 206 of 
the Federal Power Act against PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) 
alleging that, in order to advance the Commission's goal of regional 
uniformity and coordination and to avoid other market problems, PJM 
should eliminate (1) its bid cap by the end of October 2000, to 
coincide with the expiration of the New York and New England bid caps 
and (2) eliminate its ICAP requirement and deficiency charge 
commensurate with ISO-NE's actions to date. Given the immediacy of this 
date, MSCG requests fast track procession of its complaint by the 
Commission.
    Copies of the filing were served upon PJM and other interested 
parties.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions or 
protests must be filed on or before October 25, 2000. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This 
filing may also be viewed on the Internet a http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222) for assistance. Answers to the 
complaint shall also be due on or before October 26, 2000.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26618 Filed 10-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M