alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 62375]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26755]


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

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES


National Endowment for the Arts; Combined Arts Advisory Panel

    Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Public Law 92-463), as amended, notice is hereby given that two 
meetings of the Combined Arts Advisory Panel to the National Council on 
the Arts will be held at the Nancy Hanks Center, 1100 Pennsylvania 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20506 as follows:
    Folk & Traditional Arts section (B) (Access, Education, and 
Heritage/Preservation categories): October 30-31, 2000, Room 716. A 
portion of this meeting, from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. on October 31st, will be 
open to the public for policy discussion. The remaining portions of 
this meeting, from 9 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on October 30th and from 9 a.m. 
to 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 31st, will be closed.
    Dance section (Access, Education, and Heritage/Preservation 
categories): November 6-8, 2000, Room 730. A portion of this meting, 
from 4 p.m. to 5 p.m. on November 8th, will be open to the public for 
policy discussion. The remaining portions of this meeting, from 9 a.m. 
to 6 p.m. on November 6th and 7th, and from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on 
November 8th, will be closed.
    The closed portions of these meetings are for the purpose of Panel 
review, discussion, evaluation, and recommendation on applications for 
financial assistance under the National Foundation on the Arts and the 
Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, including information given in 
confidence to the agency by grant applicants. In accordance with the 
determination of the Chairman of May 12, 2000, these sessions will be 
closed to the public pursuant to (c)(4)(6) and (9)(B) of section 552b 
of Title 5, United States Code.
    Any person may observe meetings, or portions thereof, of advisory 
panels that are open to the public, and, if time allows, may be 
permitted to participate in the panel's discussions at the discretion 
of the panel chairman and with the approval of the full-time Federal 
employee in attendance.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please 
contact the Office of AccessAbility, National Endowment for the Arts, 
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506, 202/682-5532, TDY-
TDD 202/682-5496, at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting.
    Further information with reference to this meeting can be obtained 
from Ms. Kathy Plowitz-Worden, Office of Guidelines & Panel Operations, 
National Endowment for the Arts, Washington, DC 20506, or call 202/682-
5691.

    Dated: October 13, 2000.
Kathy Plowitz-Worden,
Panel Coordinator, Panel Operations, National Endowment for the Arts.
[FR Doc. 00-26755 Filed 10-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7537-01-M
*Circuit Judge of the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation. 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-10765

 

DEBRA WALKER, ET AL,

Plaintiffs,

versus

MESQUITE TX, CITY OF, ET AL, 

Defendants.

******************************************************************

HIGHLANDS OF MCKAMY IV AND COMMUNITY 

IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, ET AL,

Plaintiffs,

versus

THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF DALLAS,

Defendant-Appellee,

versus

LAWRENCE J. FRIEDMAN; FRIEDMAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.,

Appellants.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas 

(3:85-CV-1210-R)

 

January 14, 2000

Before POLITZ, GIBSON* and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We are persuaded that the sanction imposed upon Lawrence J.

Friedman, Friedman & Associates, P.C., cannot be properly
2

sustained. The order imposing sanction is reversed. 

REVERSED.
#### J. C. COSTELLO, Movant, v. Mildred EDELEN, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 11, 1951.

Davis, Boehl, Viser & Marcus, of Louisville, and William A. Miller and A. J. Deindoerfer, of Louisville, for movant.

Raymond F. Bossmeyer, of Louisville, for opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal denied. Judgment affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the QuarterlyReport of Smurfit-Stone Container Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John R. Murphy, SeniorVice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   /s/ John R.  Murphy                                |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   John R.  Murphy                                    |   |
|   Senior Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|   November 9,  2009                             |   |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or other documentauthenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appearsin typed form within the electronic version of this written statement requiredby Section 906, has been provided to Smurfit-Stone Container Enterprises, Inc.and will be retained by Smurfit-Stone Container Enterprises, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-20108

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN ANGEL BARRAZA-VARGAS, also known as Juan Angel Barraza Vargas,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CR-586-1

Before JOLLY, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Angel BarrazaVargas has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Barraza-Vargas has filed a response. The record is

insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Barraza-Vargas’s

claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; such a claim generally “cannot be

resolved on direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before the district

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 25, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 13-20108 Document: 00512419999 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2013
No. 13-20108

court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the

allegations.” United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006)

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We have reviewed counsel’s

brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as

Barraza-Vargas’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the

appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 13-20108 Document: 00512419999 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

582 

KA 14-00981 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, AND CURRAN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JEROME INGRAM, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (TIMOTHY P. MURPHY OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL J. FLAHERTY, JR., ACTING DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (MATTHEW

B. POWERS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Deborah

A. Haendiges, J.), rendered May 12, 2014. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon a jury verdict, of burglary in the second degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously reversed on the law and a new trial is granted on the

first count of the indictment. 

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him following a

jury trial of burglary in the second degree (Penal Law § 140.25 [2]),

defendant contends that the evidence is legally insufficient to

establish his guilt and the verdict is against the weight of the

evidence. We reject those contentions. Viewing the evidence in the

light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d

620, 621), we conclude that “there is a valid line of reasoning and

permissible inferences to support the jury’s finding that defendant

committed the crime[] of which he was convicted based on the evidence

presented at trial” (People v Scott, 93 AD3d 1193, 1194, lv denied 19

NY3d 967, reconsideration denied 19 NY3d 1001; see generally People v

Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Viewing the evidence in light of the

elements of the crime as charged to the jury (see People v Danielson,

9 NY3d 342, 349), we further conclude that the verdict is not against

the weight of the evidence (see generally Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495). 

Although a different verdict would not have been unreasonable, it

cannot be said that the jurors failed to give the evidence the weight

it should be accorded (see People v Canfield, 111 AD3d 1396, 1397, lv

denied 22 NY3d 1087; People v Ettleman, 109 AD3d 1126, 1128, lv denied

22 NY3d 1198). 

We agree with defendant, however, that reversal is required based

on Supreme Court’s refusal to charge criminal trespass in the second

degree (Penal Law § 140.15 [1]) as a lesser included offense of
-2- 582 

KA 14-00981 

burglary in the second degree. Viewing the evidence in the light most

favorable to defendant, as we must in this context (see People v

Randolph, 81 NY2d 868, 869), we conclude that there is “a reasonable

view of the evidence to support a finding that the defendant committed

the lesser offense but not the greater” (People v Van Norstrand, 85

NY2d 131, 135; see People v Borges, 90 AD3d 1067, 1069), i.e., that he

did not intend to commit a crime when he entered the victim’s

apartment without her permission. 

In light of our determination, we need not address defendant’s

remaining contentions, none of which, if meritorious, would result in

dismissal of the indictment. 

Entered: June 17, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  /s/ Joseph V. Gulfo, M.D.Joseph V. Gulfo, M.D.President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)  /s/ Richard I. SteinhartRichard I. SteinhartVice President & Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)  
 *
    
    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 has been provided to MELA Sciences, Inc. and will be retained by MELA Sciences,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This
written statement accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, and will not be incorporated by reference into any filing
of MELA Sciences, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
# '" "" 

# "**~ ~fA.'XIMlJ}..f**  DAII. Y S -H OUR OZONE COl\' CENTRA TlONS FOR Sn.ECTED MONITORS 2 0 12 - 2 0 1 4

# ~.. I I 

# I 

# ! , , I . I 

# I



# "
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2986 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2986

 To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to extend the temporary 
 Medicare payment rate floor for primary care services of primary care 
    physicians to nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, 
 physician assistants, and certified nurse-midwives under the Medicaid 
                    program, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 2, 2013

Ms. Bonamici (for herself and Mr. Jones) introduced the following bill; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to extend the temporary 
 Medicare payment rate floor for primary care services of primary care 
    physicians to nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, 
 physician assistants, and certified nurse-midwives under the Medicaid 
                    program, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Access to Primary Care 
Act''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY MEDICARE PAYMENT RATE FLOOR TO PRIMARY 
              CARE SERVICES FURNISHED BY HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONERS 
              UNDER MEDICAID.

    (a) In General.--Section 1902(a)(13)(C) of the Social Security Act 
(42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(13)(C)) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``or a health care practitioner who is a 
        nurse practitioner, physician assistant, or clinical nurse 
        specialist (as such terms are defined in section 1861(aa)(5)) 
        or a certified nurse midwife (as defined in section 
        1861(gg)(2))'' after ``pediatric medicine''; and
            (2) by striking ``such services and physician'' and 
        inserting ``such services and physician or health care 
        practitioner''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to items and services furnished on or after the first day of the 
first calendar quarter that begins after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
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 AXT, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2007 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, 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:



|Date: March 14, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/PHILIP C.S. YIN                     
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------
|                     |  |     |  | Philip C.S. Yin Chief Executive Officer

---



QuickLinks
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

In connection with the quarterly report of Tecumseh Products Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), I,
James S. Nicholson, 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:

     (3)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
          78o(d)); and

     (4)  the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


Dated: May 15, 2007                     BY: /s/ James S. Nicholson
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            James S. Nicholson
                                            Vice President, Treasurer and
                                            Chief Financial Officer
#### JUNGERMAN et al. v. SECURITY STATE BANK.

No. 11273.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

March 24, 1943.

Frank W. Steinle, of Jourdanton, for appellants.

Fritz C. Sorrell, of Pearsall, for appel-lee.

*253MURRAY, Justice.

A. H. Jungerman, Jr., and R. E. Malone, defendants below, have appealed from a judgment against them rendered in the District Court of Frio County in favor of Security State Bank of Pearsall. The judgment was against Jungerman for the sum of $5,471.01 and against Malone for foreclosure of a lien on thirty-eight head of cattle, but if he did not have said thirty-eight head of cattle in his possession, then the judgment against Malone was in the sum of $1,330.

The plaintiff below, Security State Bank of Pearsall, filed this suit on'May 5, 1942. The defendant Jungerman was served with citation on May 9, 1942, and defendant Malone on May 12, 1942. An answer containing a general demurrer and general denial was filed on behalf of each • defendant, on May 26, 1942, for Malone, and on May 28, 1942, for Jungerman. On July 28, 1942, Walter Stout, Esq., withdrew as attorney for Jungerman and on September 7, 1942, he withdrew as attorney for Malone.

On August 31, 1942, the cause was set for trial on September 7, 1942. When the case was called for trial on that date Frank W. Steinle, Esq., appeared for both defendants and asked leave to file an amended answer which set up no defense to the notes sued upon, but did set up certain defenses to the mortgage. The-trial-court refused leave to file this amended answer and appellants contend such action constitutes reversible error.

Defendants gave no excuse for not employing counsel sooner, other than' they thought the cause was going to be compromised, but did hot state who had led them to believe there would be a compromise.

Rule No. 63, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, provides that amended pleadings may be filed at any time, but that if such amendment is offered for filing within seven days of the date of trial leave of the judge must be first obtained before it can be filed. The rule further provides that such leave should be granted, unless there be a showing that such amendment will operate as a surprise to the opposite party.

The amended answer of Jungerman tendered for filing admitted the execution of the notes and mortgages sued upon by plaintiff, but alleged that the bank had agreed that he might dispose of these mortgaged cattle without first getting its consent. The answer of Malone set up the fact that he had paid Jungerman for the cattle he had purchased from him, and that this money or the check therefor had been turned over to the bank, and therefore they could not-now claim a lien on the cattle so purchased by him. The Bank plead surprise at these new defenses set up for the first time in these amended answers.

We are not prepared to say that the trial judge abused the discretion invested in him by Rule No. 63, Rules of Civil Procedure. Accordingly, the judgment is 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.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice 00-126]

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration announces a forthcoming meeting of the NASA Advisory Council, Aero-Space Technology Advisory Committee. 

# DATES:

Tuesday, November 28, 2000, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; and Wednesday, November 29, 2000, 8 a.m. to 12:00 Noon. 

# ADDRESSES:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Room 6H46, 300 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20546. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Mary-Ellen McGrath, Office of Aerospace Technology, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546 (202/358-4729). 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting will be open to the public up to the seating capacity of the room. The agenda for the meeting is as follows: 

—Status of Aerospace Technology Programs 

—Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATs) Report 

—Status of Icing Workshop 

—2nd, 3rd, and 4th Generation Reusable Launch Vehicles (RLVs) 

—Government Performance Results Act (GPRA) Briefings 

—Research Test Pilot Issues and Concerns 

—Subcommittee Reports 

It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants. 

Dated: October 16, 2000.

Beth M. McCormick, 

Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

[FR Doc. 00-26930 Filed 10-18-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510-01-P