alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 21, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 69967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29748]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


Bureau of International Labor Affairs; U.S. National 
Administrative Office National Advisory Committee for the North 
American Agreement on Labor Cooperation; Notice of Open Meeting

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Labor.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting December 5, 2000.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 94-
463), the U.S. National Administrative Office (NAO) gives notice of a 
meeting of the National Advisory Committee for the North American 
Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC), which was established by the 
Secretary of Labor.
    The Committee was established to provide advice to the U.S. 
Department of Labor on matters pertaining to the implementation and 
further elaboration of the NAALC, the labor side accord to the North 
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The Committee is authorized 
under Article 17 of the NAALC.
    The Committee consists of 12 independent representatives drawn from 
among labor organizations, business and industry, educational 
institutions, and the general public.

DATES: The Committee will meet on December 5, 2000 from 9 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., N 
3437-D, Washington, DC 20210. The meeting is open to the public on a 
first-come, first served basis.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lewis Karesh, designated Federal 
Officer, U.S. NAO, U.S. Bureau of International Labor Affairs, U.S. 
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room C-4327, 
Washington, DC 20210. Telephone 202-501-6653 (this is not a toll free 
number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Please refer to the notice published in the 
Federal Register on December 15, 1994 (59 FR 64713) for supplementary 
information.

    Signed at Washington, DC on November 15, 2000.
Lewis Karesh,
Acting Secretary, U.S. National Administrative Office.
[FR Doc. 00-29748 Filed 11-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-28-P
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 Amendment No. 4 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of
      Ronco
      Corporation (the “Company”) for period from July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006, as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Paul Kabashima, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec.1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec.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 results of operations of the
      Company.




February
      21, 2007




/s/
                Paul KabashimaPaul
                Kabashima
              Chief
                Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § CASE NO.: 3:22-CR-379-X

§

STEVEN ALAN POWERS (1) §

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry of a Plea of Guilty, 

the Consent of the defendant, and the Report and Recommendation Concerning Plea of Guilty of the United 

States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto having been filed within fourteen days of service in 

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the Report and 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge concerning the Plea of Guilty is correct, and it is hereby accepted by 

the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty, and STEVEN ALAN POWERS (1) hereby 

adjudged guilty of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(8) – Possession of a Firearm by a Convicted Felon. Sentence 

will be imposed in accordance with the Court's scheduling order.

 The defendant is ordered to remain in custody.

☐ The Court adopts the findings of the United States Magistrate Judge by clear and convincing evidence 

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if 

released and should therefore be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ Upon motion, this matter shall be set for hearing before the United States Magistrate Judge who set 

the conditions of release for determination, by clear and convincing evidence, of whether the 

defendant is likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released under § 

3142(b) or (c).

☐ The defendant is not ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) pending determination of 

whether it has been clearly shown that there are exceptional circumstances under § 3145(c) why the 

defendant should not be detained under § 3143(a)(2), and whether it has been shown by clear and 

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the 

community if released under § 3142(b) or (c). This matter shall be referred to the United States 

Magistrate Judge who set the conditions of release.

Signed this 7th day of August, 2024.

________________________________

BRANTLEY STARR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 3:22-cr-00379-X Document 49 Filed 08/07/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 100
Agenda 

February 2003 Refunding 

Treasury Dealer Meetings – January 30, 2003 

Dealer ___________________

To allow more time for discussion on Thursday, please e-mail your responses prior to 4:00 p.m. on 

Wednesday, January 29, to Paul Malvey, Dept. of Treasury, at paul.malvey@do.treas.gov and Richard 

Dzina, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, at richard.dzina@ny.frb.org. If you are not scheduled to 

meet with Treasury officials this quarter, your responses would still be very helpful to us, particularly 

answers to the discussion questions. Thank you. 

I. Market Borrowing Estimates

January – March ___________ 

Ending Cash Balance ___________ 

April – June ___________ 

Ending Cash Balance ___________ 

II. Budget deficit estimate

FY2003 ___________ 

 

III. February Refunding $Billion Maturity 

5-year _______ _______ 

10-year _______ _______ 

CMBs?? _______ _______ When?________ 

IV. Discussion Topics

• The Administrations’ Budget is expected to be released next week showing significantly larger 

deficits than contained in last August’s Mid-session Review. As part of financing the government 

at the lowest cost, we want to maintain a flexible issuance calendar that appeals to the broadest 

range of investors and adapts to a wide range of budgetary and financing outcomes. Going 

forward, what changes (increased frequencies, new securities) would you recommend for 

dispersing the risk we currently face with existing auction sizes? 

• Treasury is committed to the Treasury inflation-indexed securities (TIIS) market. Are you active 

in the TIIS market? What recommendations would you make to expand the TIIS market and 

promote investor interest? 

• We continue to seek ways to improve and measure our performance. Do you have suggestions or 

ideas on the factors we should be considering? Can we readily adopt private sector techniques or 

are there specific modifications needed to address public sector idiosyncrasies?
# Scipio Africanus and the Second Punic War: Joint lessons for Center of Gravity Analysis

/ Published Feb. 12, 2019

JFSC students in Joint and Combined Warfighting School, National Defense University published, 
"Scipio Africanus and the Second Punic War: Joint lessons for Center of Gravity Analysis"
 during attendance at JPME-II.  Published in JFQ 88, 10 Jan 2018
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. EC01-7-000]

Take notice that on November 21, 2000, Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation (Central Hudson) filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission a letter clarifying the nature of a proposed transaction transferring its Danskammer generating units to Dynegy Danskammer L.L.C., as described in a previous filing in the above referenced proceeding.

Central Hudson states that copies of these materials were sent to all parties appearing on the service list in the above referenced docket.

                    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such 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 should be filed on or before December 1, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. 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. This filing may also be viewed on the Internet 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. 00-30408  Filed 11-28-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Case 3:22-cr-00361-E Document 24 Filed 10/25/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 40
Order – Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

KEITH DOTSON, §

§

 Plaintiff, §

§

v. §

§

 Civil No. 3:22-CV-2026-L-Bk

FORNEY ISD ADMINISTRATION, §

§

§

 Defendant. §

ORDER

The Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge 

(“Report”) (Doc. 14) was entered on November 9, 2022, recommending that the Complaint (Doc. 

3) filed by pro se Plaintiff Keith Dotson (“Plaintiff”) be dismissed for failure to comply with a 

court order and for lack of prosecution. Plaintiff failed to respond to a court-ordered questionnaire, 

ordering him to answer questions about his claim, which he appears to file on behalf of his daughter 

who suffered an assault at her school. Doc. 3 at 1. Plaintiff did not file objections to the Report, 

and the time to do so has passed.

Having considered the Complaint, Report, file, and record in this case, the court determines 

that the magistrate judge’s finding and conclusions in the Report are correct, and accepts them as 

those of the court. Accordingly, the court dismisses without prejudice this action for failure to 

follow an order of the court and for lack of prosecution. 

The court prospectively certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good 

faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). In support of this certification, the 

court incorporates by reference the Report. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 and n.21 (5th 

Cir. 1997). Based on the magistrate judge’s Report, the court concludes that any appeal of this 

Case 3:22-cv-02026-L-BK Document 15 Filed 11/30/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 43
Order – Page 2

action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would therefore be frivolous. Howard v. 

King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). In the event of an appeal, Plaintiff may challenge this 

certification by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the clerk of 

the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202; Fed. R. App. 

P. 24(a)(5).

It is so ordered this 30th day of November, 2022.

_________________________________

Sam A. Lindsay

United States District Judge

Case 3:22-cv-02026-L-BK Document 15 Filed 11/30/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 44
U.S. flag
      An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.
        Here's how you know
      Here's how you know**Official websites use .gov**
            
            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
      **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
            
            A **lock** (
            A locked padlock
            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Menu

      
        close

            
            
                                              About
          Charter
          Legislation
          Members
          Meetings
          Reports & Resources

                            
                                About
          Contact Us
                  Share
FacebookXLinkedInRedditPinterestEmail Home
 Friday March 3, 2006 Meeting March 3, 2006
White House Conference Center
Truman Room
726 Jackson Place NW
Washington, DC 20503

AgendaMeeting SummaryWritten Questions from Meeting
  
Date Published: March 3, 2006
 Top

      Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

        
        
                        Facebook
          
                      X
          
                      YouTube
  

      Secondary Footer link menu
            Accessibility
              Plain Language
              Privacy Policy
              Legal Policies and Disclaimer
              No FEAR Act
              Freedom of Information Act
              USA.gov
              Justice.gov
#### ROSE et al. v. GREAK.

No. 3733.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

Aug. 28, 1940.

Wood, Morrow; Gresham & McCorquo-dale, of Houston, for appellants.

Thos. A. Wheat and Chap B. Cain, both of Liberty, for appellee.

COMBS, Justice.

On motion of the parties this cause is dismissed. This order is subject to payment of costs of this appeal, which are taxed against appellants.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

NATHANIEL KING,

Plaintiff,

v. No. 4:22-cv-00929-P

DFW INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BOARD,

Defendant.

FINAL JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Court’s summary judgment order entered this 

day and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, it is the final judgment of 

the Court that Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. 

See FED. R. CIV. P. 58. 

SO ORDERED on this 6th day of October 2023.

Case 4:22-cv-00929-P Document 43 Filed 10/06/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 2117
**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 theQuarterly Report of SITEL Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jorge A. Celaya, ExecutiveVice President, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that to my knowledge:

 

(1)          The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
|                                               |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                               |   |
| /s/  *Jorge A. Celaya*                             |   |
| **Jorge A. Celaya**                                |   |
| Executive  Vice President, Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

August 9, 2005
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 Advanced Plant Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
      (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each
      of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, 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 his 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 operation of the Company.





3.
      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.




Date:
      May
      18, 2007


By:
            /s/
              DAVID LIEBERMANDavid
                LiebermanChief
                Financial Officer
*

John T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Ret.), Seventh Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment.

1Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

NO. 07-00-0490-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL E

JANUARY 8, 2003

______________________________

MARK ANTHONY BERNAL, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 176TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY;

NO. 743691; HONORABLE BRIAN RAINS, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before QUINN and REAVIS, JJ. and BOYD, S.J.*

MEMORANDUM OPINION1
2

Pursuant to a plea bargain for aggravated sexual assault of a child, appellant was

granted deferred adjudication and placed on community supervision for ten years. Upon

the State’s motion to proceed with an adjudication of guilt, appellant plead true to the

allegations and the trial court adjudicated him guilty and sentenced him to ten years

confinement and a $500 fine. By two points of error, appellant asserts the trial court

committed reversible error in assessing a ten-year sentence because it was not

proportional to the offense committed and violated his federal and state rights against cruel

and unusual punishment.

We hold that appellant did not preserve his complaints for appellate review.

Although article 42.12, section 5(b) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure permits an

appeal from assessment of punishment after an adjudication of guilt, it is still necessary

to object at the time punishment is assessed to preserve the complaint. See Tex. R. App.

P. 33.1(a)(1)(A); see also Hardeman v. State, 1 S.W.3d 689, 690 (Tex.Cr.App. 1999).

Appellant did not object to the court’s assessment of a ten-year sentence. Thus, his

complaint is waived. Appellant’s points of error are overruled.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
#### Dorothy PENDERGRASS, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 22042.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 18, 1942.

Simpson & Parker, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Murder is the offense; the punishment, five years in the state penitentiary.

Appellant has filed her affidavit advising this court that she does not further desire *1024to prosecute her appeal, and prays that the appeal be dismissed.

The appeal is dismissed at the request of appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.
Case 3:22-cv-03272-C-BK Document 13 Filed 10/24/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 35
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Pension  Partners  1994-D,  Ltd.'s  balance  sheet and  statement of  operations
contained  in its Form 10-Q for the  quarter  ended  September  30,  1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         1,846
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  46,086
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               47,932
<PP&E>                                         3,078,529
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,338,847)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 787,614
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,527
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     784,087
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   787,614
<SALES>                                        127,914
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               127,950
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  37,539<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                53,036
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            53,036
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   53,036
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes general and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>



</TABLE>