alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 6222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2829]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CA-320-1820-XQ]


Notice of Resource Advisory Council Meeting

AGENCY:  Bureau of Land Management, Interior, Northwest California 
Resource Advisory Council, Redding, California.

ACTION:  Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY:  Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory 
Committees Act (Public Law 92-463) and the Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act (Public Law 94-579), the U.S. Bureau of Land 
Management's Northwest California Resource Advisory Council will meet 
Thursday and Friday, March 30 and 31, 2000, for a business meeting and 
field tour. The meeting and tour are open to the public, but anyone 
attending must provide their own transportation and lunch.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The meeting begins at 10 a.m. Thursday, 
March 30, at the Bureau of Land Management's Redding Field Office, 355 
Hemsted Drive, Redding, CA. The members will depart immediately for a 
tour of public lands managed by the BLM's Redding Field Office. On 
Friday, March 31, the business meeting begins at 8 a.m. in the 
Conference Room of the Redding Field Office. Agenda items include an 
update on the Headwaters Forest, the status of the Redding Resource 
Management Plan amendment process, a status report on recovery from the 
Lowden Fire, and a status report on a management feasibility study for 
the Lake Berryessa region.
    Time will be set aside for public comments. Depending on the number 
of persons wishing to speak, a time limit may be established.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT:  Lynda J. Roush, BLM Arcata Field 
Manager, at (707) 825-2300.

Joseph J. Fontana,
Public Affairs Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-2829 Filed 2-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
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 on Form 10-Q of Incara Pharmaceuticals Corporation (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about
the date hereof (the Report), I, Clayton I. Duncan, President and Chief Executive Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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/ RICHARD W. REICHOWRichard W. ReichowExecutive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and TreasurerAugust 13, 2003
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3338 

To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to provide, because 

of problems relating to the operation of Exchanges, for a hardship 

exemption from the individual mandate for months of noncoverage, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 24, 2013 

Mrs. ELLMERS (for herself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois) 

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

Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

to provide, because of problems relating to the operation 

of Exchanges, for a hardship exemption from the individual mandate for months of noncoverage, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fairness In Failed 

5 Federal Exchange Act of 2013’’. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3338 IH

1 SEC. 2. WAIVER OF INDIVIDUAL MANDATE THROUGH AP2 PLICATION OF HARDSHIP EXEMPTION. 

3 Section 1311(d) of the Patient Protection and Af4 fordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18031(d)) is amended by 

5 adding at the end the following new paragraph: 

6 ‘‘(8) APPLICATION OF HARDSHIP EXEMPTION

7 IN CASES OF NONCOVERAGE.—An applicable indi8 vidual (as defined in subsection (d) of section 5000A 

9 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) who is not 

10 covered by minimum essential coverage and who is 

11 eligible to enroll through an Exchange for coverage 

12 under a qualified health plan for a month— 

13 ‘‘(A) in 2014 is deemed (for purposes of 

14 this Act and the amendments made by this Act) 

15 to have had a certification by the Secretary 

16 under paragraph (4)(H) with respect to the 

17 hardship exemption described in subsection 

18 (e)(5)(H) of such section for such month; and 

19 ‘‘(B) in a subsequent year is deemed (for 

20 such purposes) to have had a certification by 

21 the Secretary under such paragraph with re22 spect to such hardship exemption if the indi23 vidual executes an attestation that the indi24 vidual has been unable to enroll in such a plan 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3338 IH

1 through such Exchange for a month in such 

2 year.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
DECEMBER, 1769.

#### Govane *against*Govane.

*WILLIAM GOVANE,*of *Baltimore*County, devised the ' bulk of his real and personal estate to two natural children, and appointed them residuary legatees. The executors named in the will refused to act, and the widow applied for letters of administration, which application was opposed on the behalf of the children, who being under age, it was moved, that letters of administration be granted to some person during their minority, it being contended that they were entitled to the administration as residuary legatees.

Hall, for the widow,

cited the statute of 31 *Echo.*III. c. 11. which entitles the most lawful friend to the administration, and also the statute of 21 *Hen.*VIII. c. *5.*which gives it to the widow or the next of kin. ■ By the first statute, he argued, that by implication the widow was entitled as the most lawful friend, and by the latter she Was entitled to it by express terms.

Jenings, contra,

argued, that the statute of 21 Hen, VIII. in case of an intestacy, appointed the widow or the next of kin to the administration, on a supposition that they were per^pns for whom the intestate had the greatest regard; but that, by appointing a residuary legatee, this presumption is destroyed, it being a plain indication that the deceased intended rather to prefer others, and it would be absurd to admit presumptive evidence when there is better proof to the contrary, and it is a manifest departure from the rule, *presumptio stabit donee probetur in*contra« *347
      *rium.*1 Vent. 217. 1 *Show.*26. 1 *Fern.*280. *Dyer,*872. 2 *Bac.*381.

*Hall,*in reply.

The cases cited were not applicable to the matter in controversy, the residuary legatees being in those cases the interested parties,; and though the spiritual Court would not grant administration to the next of kin, %vho derived no interest under the will, in prejudice of a residuary legatee who did, yet, in the present dispute, the widow is equally interested, being entitled to a distributive share of the personal estate under the law of the Province ; he therefore contended, that the Court ought not to grant administration to a residuary legatee in preference to a person equally interested and expressly mentioned in the statute, the consideration of interest being the sole inducement with the Court, in any instance for preferring the residuary legatee to the widow or the next of kin. 1*Jones, 225. 2 Sid, lié.*2 *Stra.*857. 4 *Burn,*200. 2 *Stra.*856. 891. *956.*

The Court determined, that administration be granted to the children.
#### SCHUNKE v. STATE.

No. 23765.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 4, 1947.

No appearance for appellant.

A. C. Winborn, Cr. Dist. Atty., and E. T. Branch, Asst. Cr. Dist. Atty., both of Houston, and Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the theft of $15 worth of spark plugs, and his punishment assessed at two years in the county jail.

No bills of exception or statement of facts are in the record. No objections to any procedural matters appear. The complaint and information properly charge the offense.

The judgment is affirmed.
<PAGE>   1


EXHIBIT 11.1

SCHEDULE OF COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                      THREE MONTHS ENDED                    NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                         DECEMBER 31,                         DECEMBER 31,
                                                    1997               1996              1997               1996
                                                    ----               ----              ----               ----
<S>                                            <C>                <C>                <C>                <C>         
Net Loss applicable to Common Stock            $  (355,471)       $  (595,369)       $(1,122,698)       $(1,735,220)

Weighted average number of common shares
outstanding:                                     3,741,931          3,665,395          3,716,173          3,665,395

Net loss per common share                      $     (0.10)       $     (0.16)       $     (0.30)$      $     (0.47)
</TABLE>


Basic and fully diluted calculations are identical.
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 99.3

                              [GRANT THORNTON LLP]

      REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS ON MANAGEMENT'S ASSERTION ON
          COMPLIANCE WITH MINIMUM SERVICING STANDARDS SET FORTH IN THE
                     UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR
                                MORTGAGE BANKERS

Board of Directors
Countrywide Credit Industries, Inc.

We have examined management's assertion about Countrywide Credit Industries,
Inc. and Subsidiaries (which includes its wholly-owned subsidiary, Countrywide
Home Loans, inc.) ("the Company") compliance with the minimum servicing
standards identified in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform
Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) as of and for the year
ended February 29, 2000, included in the accompanying management assertion.
Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with those minimum
servicing standards. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's
assertion about the entity's compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
minimum servicing standards and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a
legal determination on the Company's compliance with the minimum servicing
standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that Countrywide Credit Industries, Inc.
and Subsidiaries (which includes its wholly-owned subsidiary Countrywide Home
Loans, Inc.) complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of
and for the year ended February 29, 2000 is fairly stated, in all material
respects.

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 24, 2000


<PAGE>   2
                            [COUNTRYWIDE LETTERHEAD]

March 24, 2000

Grant Thornton LLP
1000 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA  90017

Gentlemen:

As of and during the year ended February 29, 2000, Countrywide Credit
Industries, Inc. and Subsidiaries (which includes its wholly-owned subsidiary
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.) ("the Company") has complied in all material
respects with the minimum servicing standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers
Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage
Bankers. As of and during the same period, the Company had in effect a fidelity
bond and errors and omissions policy in the amount of $30,000,000.

/s/ Carlos M. Garcia
---------------------------
Carlos M. Garcia
Managing Director-Finance
Chief Financial Officer and
Chief Accounting Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

DAVID SAMBRANO, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

v. No. 4:21-cv-1074-P

UNITED AIRLINES, INC.,

Defendant.

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Lift Stay and for Entry of 

Partial Final Judgment. ECF No. 279. To expedite resolution of this 

issue, the Court ORDERS Defendant to respond by no later than 

Wednesday, September 25, 2024. Plaintiff may reply by no later than 

Friday, September 27, 2024.

SO ORDERED this 20th day of September 2024.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

REGINALEA KEMP,

Plaintiff,

v. No. 4:23-cv-00841-P

REGIONS BANK ET AL.,

Defendants.

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Leave to File 

Second Amended Complaint. ECF No. 18. Having considered the Motion 

and applicable docket entries, the Court GRANTS the Motion.

SO ORDERED on this 18th day of September 2023.

______________________________________________ 

Mark T. Pittman 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:21-cv-01074-P Document 281 Filed 09/20/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 19348
LEMMIE T. STRAUGHTER, IV , Appellant,

v. STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
CASE NO. 1D 1 6

- 4 33 4

_____________________________/ Opinion filed March 10, 2017. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County

. Michael Flowers , Judge

. Lemmie T. Straughter, IV , pro se, Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Kathryn Lane , Assistant Atto rney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.
We dismiss this appeal as untimely . T he final order was rendered on August 5, 2016, making any notice of appeal due to be filed no later than September 6,
2016 ( because the 30th day fe ll on Sunday , and Monday was Labor Day, a legal holiday)

. Appellant’s notice of appeal was not delivered to prison officials for2 mailing until September 8, 2016, which was late and therefore ineffective to invoke our jurisdiction

. Griffin v. Sistuenck , 816 So. 2d 600, 6 01 (Fla. 2002).
DISMISSED.
ROWE , KELSEY, and JAY, J J ., CONCUR.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 209 (Friday, October 27, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 64432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27698]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D. 101700C]


Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Surf Clam 
and Ocean Quahog Fisheries; 2001 Cage Tags

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of vendor to provide fishing year 2001 cage tags.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS informs surf clam and ocean quahog allocation owners that 
they will be required to purchase their fishing year 2001 cage tags 
from a vendor.

ADDRESSES: Written inquiries may be sent to Walt Gardiner at: National 
Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn 
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-3799.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Walt Gardiner, Fishery Management 
Specialist, (978) 281-9326.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal Atlantic surf clam and ocean quahog 
fishery regulations at 50 CFR 648.75(b) authorize the Administrator, 
Northeast Region, NMFS, to specify in the Federal Register a vendor 
from whom cage tags, required under the Atlantic Surf Clam and Ocean 
Quahog Fishery Management Plan, must be purchased. National Band and 
Tag Company of Newport, KY, is the authorized vendor of cage tags 
required for the year 2001 Federal surf clam and ocean quahog 
fisheries. Detailed instructions for purchasing these cage tags will be 
provided in a letter to allocation owners within the next several 
weeks.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: October 21, 2000.
Bruce C. Morehead,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 00-27698 Filed 10-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE: 3510-22 -S
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 211 (Tuesday, October 31, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 64937]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27858]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RT01-67-000]


GridFlorida LLC, Florida Power & Light Co., Florida Power 
Corporation, and Tampa Electric Co.; Supplemental Notice of Filing

October 25, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 16, 2000, Florida Power & Light 
Company, Florida Power Corporation, and Tampa Electric Company 
(collectively, the Applicants), pursuant to Sections 203 and 205 of the 
Federal Power Act, jointly filed their Order No. 2000 compliance filing 
providing for the creation of a Regional Transmission Organization 
(RTO). In a Notice of Filng issued October 20, 2000, the date for 
interventions, comments, and protests with respect to that filing was 
established as November 20, 2000.
    The Applicants have requested, to facilitate the continuing 
collaborative process, that interested parties be permitted additional 
time to submit their comments on the portion of their Application for 
which an additional filing will be make on December 15, 2000.
    Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest should 
file a motion to intervene, comments, or protests with the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 
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, comments and protests with respect to the matters for which 
Applicants have requested expedited treatment should be filed on or 
before November 20, 2000. All such motions, comments and protests with 
respect to the matters for which Applicants have not requested 
expedited treatment will be due within 30 days from the date Applicants 
make their additional filing implementing details of their RTO 
proposal. Beginning November 1, 2000, comments and protests may be 
filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site 
at http;//www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-27858 Filed 10-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [NAFTA—4070] 

Pursuant to Title V of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act and in accordance with Section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2331), an investigation was initiated on August 10, 2000, in response to a worker petition which was filed by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, District 24, Local Lodge 1432, on behalf of workers at Consolidated Metco, Inc., Rivergate Plant, Portland, Oregon.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently further investigation in this case would serve no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 20th day of October, 2000.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. 00-28024  Filed 10-31-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-M