alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 22, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 70340]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29866]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL01-2-000]


Notice of Amendment to Complaint

November 16, 2000.
    Californians for Renewable Energy, Inc. (CARE), Complainant v. 
Independent Energy Producers, Inc. and All Sellers of Energy and 
Ancillary Services Into the Energy and Ancillary Services Markets 
Operated by the California Independent System Operator Corporation 
and the California Power Exchange; All Scheduling Coordinators 
Acting On Behalf of the Above Sellers; California Independent System 
Operator Corporation; and California Power Exchange Corporation, 
Respondents; Notice of Amendment to Complaint.

    Take notice that on October 31, 2000, Californians for Renewable 
Energy, Inc. (CARE) filed an amendment to their Complaint filed in the 
above-referenced proceeding on October 6, 2000.
    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 and 
protests must be filed on or before November 30, 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 at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Answers to the 
amendment of the complaint shall also be due on or before November 30, 
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.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-29866 Filed 11-21-00; 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.                  

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [FEMA-1347-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the State of Arizona FEMA-1347-DR, dated November 8, 2000, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

November 8, 2000. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Madge Dale, Response and Recovery Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3772. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this disaster is closed effective November 8, 2000. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) 

Lacy E. Suiter, 

Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate. 

[FR Doc. 00-30451 Filed 11-28-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 230 (Wednesday, November 29, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 71099]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30343]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP00-433-001]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

November 22, 2000.

    Take notice that on November 15, 2000, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern) tendered for filing to become part of Northern's FERC Gas 
Tariffs, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets 
proposed to be effective on November 3, 2000:

Fifth Revised Volume No. 1
    Third Revised Sheet No. 7
Original Volume No. 2
    Ninth Revised Sheet No. 1A.2
    38 Revised Sheet No. 1C.a
    Second Revised Sheet No. 2144

    Northern states that the above sheets represent cancellation of 
Rate Schedule T-44 from Northern's Original Volume No. 2 FERC Gas 
Tariff, and its associated deletion from the Table of Contents in 
Northern's Volume Nos. 1 and 2 tariffs.
    Northern states that copies of the filing were served upon the 
company's customers and interested state Commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest said 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 in 
accordance with 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://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 
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. 00-30343 Filed 11-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-U
#### MORGAN v. STATE.

No. 21717.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 12, 1941.

R. L. Moulden, of McKinney, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in Collin County on a charge of driving while intoxicated, and assessed a penalty of five days in the county jail and a fine of $50.

The procedure appears to be regular. No statement of facts or bills of exception are presented and there is nothing for this court to review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
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 LeCroy
Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 2, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Sean B. OConnor, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: February 11, 2010



/s/ Sean B. OConnorSean B. OConnorChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
US ONCOLOGY HOLDINGS, INC. AND US ONCOLOGY, INC.



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 US Oncology Holdings, Inc. and US Oncology, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael A. Sicuro, 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:

(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/ Michael A. Sicuro                           
|Michael A. Sicuro                               
|Chief Financial Officer of                      
|US Oncology Holdings, Inc. and US Oncology, Inc.
|                                                
|May 7, 2009                                     
|
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Shaun R. Tutt, Also Known as Shawn R. Tutt, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Torres, J.), rendered on January 13, 1989, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree and sentencing defendant to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of *IV2*to *4Vi*years, unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. *(People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302, 305.)

*366Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms.” *(People v Felman,*141 AD2d 889, 890, *lv denied*72 NY2d 918.). Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Smith, JJ.
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 Veterans Affairs

This gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463) of October 6, 1972, that the Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education has been renewed for a 2-year period beginning November 14, 2000, through November 14, 2002.

Dated: November 17, 2000.

By direction of the Acting Secretary.

Marvin R. Eason,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-30297  Filed 11-27-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
## United States Court of Appeals
**For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________

No. 23 -1 331

___________________________ James M. Raper, Jr.

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - A ppel lant

v.

Mark Gober; Drew County Detention Center; Does, All Guards and Employees of Drew County Detention Center; Susan Potts, Ambassador Drew County Jail; Robert Akin, Drew County Judge

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central

____________

Submitted: June 16, 2023 Filed: June 26, 2 023 [Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, SHEPHERD, and STRAS , Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

James Raper, Jr., appeals t he grant of summary judgment to jail officials who allegedly delayed medical treatment for a spider bite and turned off the water to the-2- toilet in his cell . Having carefully reviewed the record 1 and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that no material facts are in dispute and the officials are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Johnson v. Leonard , 929 F.3d 569, 574

– 75 (8th Cir. 2019) (reviewing a grant of summary judgment de novo and explaining
that a deliberate

- indifference claim requires showing that the “defendants knew of ” an objectively serious medical need “ yet deliberately disregarded it” ( citation omitted)); Smith v. Copeland , 87 F.3d 265, 268

– 69 (8th Cir. 1996) (holding that four days in a cell with raw sewage from an overflowed toilet was not “cruel and unusual punishment”). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court. 2 See 8th
Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1 We deny the pending motion to present evidence. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(a)(1) (making district

- court exhibits part of the record on appeal).

2 The Honorable James M. Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Edie R. Ervin, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 14, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 68158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29036]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Importation of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    Pursuant to section 1008 of the Controlled Substances Import and 
Export Act (21 U.S.C. 958(I)), the Attorney General shall, prior to 
issuing a registration under this Section to a bulk manufacturer of a 
controlled substance in Schedule I or II and prior to issuing a 
regulation under Section 1002(a) authorizing the importation of such a 
substance, provide manufacturers holding registrations for the bulk 
manufacture of the substance an opportunity for a hearing.
    Therefore, in accordance with section 1301.34 of Title 21, Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR), notice is hereby given that on February 3, 
2000, Stepan Company, Natural Products Department, 100 W. Hunter 
Avenue, Maywood, New Jersey 07607, made application by renewal to the 
Drug Enforcement Administration to be registered as an importer of coca 
leaves (9040), a basic class of controlled substance listed in Schedule 
II.
    The firm plans to import the coca leaves to manufacture bulk 
controlled substance.
    Any manufacturer holding, or applying for, registration as a bulk 
manufacturer of this basic class of controlled substance may file 
written comments on or objections to the application described above 
and may, at the same time, file a written request for a hearing on such 
application in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.43 is such form as 
prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47.
    Any such comments, objections or requests for a hearing may be 
addressed, in quintuplicate, to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, 
Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, United 
States Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20537, Attention: DEA 
Federal Register Representative (CCR), and must be filed no later than 
(30 days from publication).
    This procedure is to be conducted simultaneously with and 
independent of the procedures described in 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d), 
(e), and (f). As noted in a previous notice at 40 FR 43745-46 
(September 23, 1975), all applicants for registration to import a basic 
class of any controlled substance in Schedule I or II are and will 
continue to be required to demonstrate to the Deputy Assistant 
Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 
Administration that the requirements for such registration pursuant to 
21 U.S.C. 958(a), 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and 21 CFR 1301.34(a), (b), (c), 
(d), (e), and (f) are satisfied.

    Dated: October 31, 2000.
John H. King,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-29036 Filed 11-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
#### MONTGOMERY v. STATE.

No. 21028.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 16, 1940.

J. Farris Fish, of Matador, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted upon complaint and information in the county court of Hall County on a charge of violating the motor registration statute and was assessed a fine of $50. The information, which is consistent with the complaint, alleges that he sold a “second hand -and used vehicle, to-wit, a truck”, without delivering to the transferee license receipt issued therefor during the year 1939 and was not delivering to the transferee a bill of sale in triplicate as required by the statute. Defendant timely filed a motion to quash the complaint and information, which was refused.

It will be observed that the allegations are not in the language of the statute. There is no allegation that it was a vehicle required to be registered by law and to which the law regulating the transfer would apply. The complaint and information refer to a “vehicle, towit, a truck”. The name truck is applied to more, than one kind and character of vehicle. The original meaning of the word seems to have been a strong, small wheel. It is now applied generally to wheeled vehicles used in carrying heavy loads. ■ Strong frames or platforms on wheels such as used for carrying baggage in and around railroad stations are commonly referred to’ as trucks. A frame work mounted on wheels used to support one end of a locomotive is commonly referred to as a truck. A strong carriage used about a sawmill for conveying heavy timber is generally referred to as a truck. The statute does not provide that either of these should be registered, or that the law regulating the transfer of motor vehicles shall apply to them. The article of the statute under which the prosecution was had applies to only such vehicles as are required to be registered under the laws of this state. The pleading is defective in that it fails to. sufficiently describe a vehicle to which the law applies.

The motion to quash the complaint and information should have been sustained. The case is reversed and ordered dismissed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tomas Romero, Also Known as Thomas Romero, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Harold Silverman, J.), rendered February 21, 1989, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to two concurrent indeterminate terms of 4 Vi to 9 years’ imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s conviction arises out of his arrest for the street sale of crack cocaine to an undercover officer in exchange for premarked currency. The exchange was observed by another officer, and the premarked currency and additional drugs were recovered from defendant’s person at the scene.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. *(People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620.) The trier of fact is in the best position to observe the demeanor of the witnesses and assess their credibility. *(People v Mosley,*112 AD2d 812, 814, *affd*67 NY2d 985.) No basis to disturb the jury’s findings appears on this record.

Defendant now argues that he was denied his right of confrontation when, in his absence, a postcharge conference was held among the Trial Judge, defense counsel and the Assistant District Attorney, which was limited to noting defense counsel’s exceptions to the court’s charge to the jury. The conference cannot be considered a material stage of the trial *(see, People v Ciaccio,*47 NY2d 431) at which defendant’s absence, without objection before the trial court, affected any *317substantial right of the defendant *(see, People v Van,*161 AD2d 326, *lv denied*76 NY2d 867), or bore any reasonably substantial relation to defendant’s opportunity to defend against the charges *(see, Snyder v Massachusetts,*291 US 97). Concur—Carro, J. P., Asch, Kassal and Smith, JJ.