alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #20612; CALIFORNIA Disaster Number CA-20022 Declaration of Economic Injury]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of California dated September 6, 2024.
 DATES: Issued on September 6, 2024. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         June 6, 2025.
 ADDRESSES: *Visit the MySBA Loan Portal at https://lending.sba.gov*
                         to apply for a disaster assistance loan.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's EIDL declaration, applications for disaster loans may be submitted online using the MySBA Loan Portal 
                    *https://lending.sba.gov*
                     or other locally announced locations. Please contact the SBA disaster assistance customer service center by email at 
                    *disastercustomerservice@sba.gov*
                     or by phone at 1-800-659-2955 for further assistance. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Incident:*
                     Lake Fire. *Incident Period:*
                     July 5, 2024 through August 4, 2024. *Primary Counties:* Santa Barbara. *Contiguous Counties:* California: Kern, San Luis Obispo, Ventura. The Interest Rates are: PercentBusiness and Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.250
 The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 206120. The State which received an EIDL Declaration is California. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Isabella Guzman, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2024-20775 Filed 9-12-24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ROBERT E. CARUSO, 

Plaintiff,

STEPHEN KERR EUGSTER, 

Appellant, sub nom.

 v. 

WASHINGTON STATE BAR 

ASSOCIATION 1933, a legislatively 

created Washington association, State Bar 

Act (WSBA 1933); et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-35557 

D.C. No. 2:17-cv-00003-RSM 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Ricardo S. Martinez, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 12, 2019**

Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Stephen Kerr Eugster, attorney for plaintiff Robert E. Caruso, appeals pro se 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAR 19 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-35557 

from the district court’s order imposing pre-filing restrictions on Eugster as a 

vexatious litigant. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for 

an abuse of discretion. Molski v. Evergreen Dynasty Corp., 500 F.3d 1047, 1056 

(9th Cir. 2007). We vacate and remand.

The district court gave Eugster notice and an opportunity to be heard, 

created an adequate record for review, and made substantive findings as to the 

frivolous or harassing nature of Eugster’s prior actions. However, the district 

court’s order is not narrowly tailored to Eugster’s abuses because it imposes prefiling restrictions on lawsuits “against the WSBA, its employees, or agents” and 

facial challenges to “Washington State’s attorney bar system,” without limiting the 

types of claims or challenges to those that Eugster had been filing vexatiously. See 

Ringgold–Lockhart v. County of Los Angeles, 761 F.3d 1057, 1061-67 (9th Cir. 

2014) (discussing procedural and substantive standards for a federal pre-filing 

order based on a vexatious litigant determination). We vacate entry of the prefiling order and remand for the district court to enter a pre-filing order that is 

narrowly tailored to the claims that Eugster has previously brought.

We do not consider the district court’s order denying disqualification of 

Judge Martinez because the order is outside the scope of this appeal. See Fed. R. 

App. P. 3(c) (required contents of notice of appeal); Havensight Capital LLC v. 

Nike, Inc., 891 F.3d 1167, 1171 (9th Cir. 2018) (factors to consider when a party 
3 18-35557 

seeks to argue the merits of an order that does not appear on the face of the notice 

of appeal).

We reject as without merit Eugster’s contention that the district court 

committed fraud by entering the pre-filing order.

Eugster’s request for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 15) is denied. 

Eugster’s request for oral argument, set forth in the opening brief, is denied.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

VACATED and REMANDED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DATED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             360
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,166
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,028
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                16,347
<PP&E>                                          11,448
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,740
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  22,450
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,823
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        328
<COMMON>                                            91
<OTHER-SE>                                     (8,015)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    22,450
<SALES>                                         42,300
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                42,300
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,267
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,998
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 854
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,819)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        86
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,905)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (14,343)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (24,248)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.66)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.66)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectuses
(including in the Prospectuses on Form S-3 included therein) constituting part
of the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-20037, 33-68128, 333-75445
and 333-56448) and on Form S-3 (No. 333-59688) of Moore Medical Corp. and its
subsidiary of our report dated March 27, 2003, appearing on page 15 of this Form
10-K. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading "Experts" in such
Prospectuses.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
--------------------------------
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Hartford, Connecticut
March 28, 2003
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 24

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

        Each director and/or officer of Value City Department Stores, Inc. (the
"Corporation") whose signature appears below hereby appoints James A. McGrady
and Julia A. Davis as the undersigned's attorney or either of them individually
as the undersigned's attorney, to sign, in the undersigned's name and behalf and
in any and all capacities stated below, and to cause to be filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission"), the Corporation's Annual
Report on Form 10-K (the "Form 10-K") for the fiscal year ended February 1,
2003, and likewise to sign and file with the Commission any and all amendments
to the Form 10-K, and the Corporation hereby appoints such persons as its
attorneys-in-fact and each of them as its attorney-in-fact with like authority
to sign and file the Form 10-K and any amendments thereto granting to each
attorney-in-fact full power of substitution and revocation, and hereby ratifying
all that any such attorney-in-fact or the undersigned's substitute may do by
virtue hereof.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands effective as of the
1st day of May, 2003.

<TABLE>
<S>                                                <C>
/s/ Jay L. Schottenstein                           Chairman of the Board of Directors
---------------------------------------
Jay L. Schottenstein

/s/ John C. Rossler                                President and Chief Executive Officer
---------------------------------------            (Principal Executive Officer)
John C. Rossler

/s/ James A. McGrady                               Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer
---------------------------------------            and Secretary (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
James A. McGrady

/s/ Henry L. Aaron                                 Director
---------------------------------------
Henry L. Aaron

/s/ Ari Deshe                                      Director
---------------------------------------
Ari Deshe

/s/ Jon P. Diamond                                 Director
---------------------------------------
Jon P. Diamond

/s/ Elizabeth M. Eveillard                         Director
---------------------------------------
Elizabeth M. Eveillard

/s/ Harvey L. Sonnenberg                           Director
---------------------------------------
Harvey L. Sonnenberg

/s/ James L. Weisman                               Director
---------------------------------------
James L. Weisman
</TABLE>


                                      E-22
ROBERT BRZOZOWSKI

, 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 14

- 2941

_____________________________/

Opinion filed March 17, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County

. William F. Stone , Judge

. Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Barbara J. Busharis, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee , for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Charles R. Mccoy, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM

.

AFFIRMED. See White v. Florida Dept. of Children & Families , 981 So. 2d

1233, 1235 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) ; Jackson v. State , 802 So. 2 d 1213, 1216 (Fla. 2d

DCA 2002) (recognizing that immediate release is not the pr oper remedy for

violations of the post

- commitment procedures in section 394.918, Florida Statutes)

.2 LEWIS, OSTERHAUS, and KELSEY, JJ., concur

.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2617 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2617

 To recognize the National Aviation Cadet Museum of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 22, 2018

Mr. Boozman (for himself and Mr. Cotton) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To recognize the National Aviation Cadet Museum of the United States.

    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 ``National Aviation Cadet Museum of 
the United States Recognition Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that--
            (1) in 1994, former aviation cadet and Air Force First 
        Lieutenant Errol Severe founded the Aviation Cadet Museum;
            (2) from 1917 to 1965, the flying cadet and succeeding 
        aviation cadet programs served as the primary production source 
        for nearly 500,000 joint-service pilots, navigators, and 
        bombardiers;
            (3) the bravery, courage, dedication, and heroism of 
        aviators and supporting ground crews from the Army Air Corps 
        and the Army Air Forces were critical factors in defeating the 
        enemies of the United States during World War I and World War 
        II;
            (4) the Aviation Cadet Museum in Eureka Springs, Arkansas, 
        is the only museum in the United States that exists exclusively 
        to preserve and promote an understanding of the role of 
        aviation cadets in the 20th century; and
            (5) the Aviation Cadet Museum is dedicated to--
                    (A) celebrating the spirit of the United States; 
                and
                    (B) recognizing the teamwork, collaboration, 
                patriotism, and courage of the individuals who trained 
                for and fought in, and the individuals on the homefront 
                who mobilized and supported, the national aviation 
                effort.

SEC. 3. RECOGNITION OF NATIONAL AVIATION CADET MUSEUM OF THE UNITED 
              STATES.

    (a) Recognition.--The Aviation Cadet Museum in Eureka Springs, 
Arkansas, is recognized as the National Aviation Cadet Museum of the 
United States.
    (b) Effect of Recognition.--
            (1) In general.--The national museum recognized by 
        subsection (a) is not a unit of the National Park System.
            (2) Use of federal funds.--The recognition of the national 
        museum by subsection (a) shall not require Federal funds to be 
        expended for any purpose related to the national museum.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of Moore Medical Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 29, 2001 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, John M. Zinzarella, Vice President of Finance, Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 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) and 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/ John M. Zinzarella
John M. Zinzarella, CPA
Vice President of Finance, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
March 28, 2003
Addendum to the Technical Support Document Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); Preventi on for Significant

Deterioration Review (PSD), Nonattain ment NSR (NNSR) for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, NSR Reform, and a Standard Permit Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2006-0133

This an addendum to the Technical Suppor t Document for the proposed action on SIP Revisions to the Texas SIP relating to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention for Significant Deterioration Review (PSD), Nonattainment NSR (NNSR) for the 1997 8-H our Ozone Standard, NSR Reform, and a Standard Permit. This addendum identifies ch anges to the final ac tion relative to the September 23, 2009, proposed action. See 74 FR 48467. These changes are the result of a later SIP revision that the Texas Comm ission on Environmental Quality submitted on July 16, 2010, that revised 30 TAC 116.160 – Pr evention of Significant Deterioration Requirements. These changes correct the defici encies correct the deficiencies identified in the proposal. Consequently, EPA is approving the revisions to 30 TAC 116.160 in a separate action under Docket No. EPA- R06-OAR-2010-0620. The changes to the Technical Support Document are as follows.

1. The table on page 1 is revised as follows:

Section Title Approve, Disapprove, or No Action * * * * * * * Chapter 116 – Control of Air Pollution by P ermits for New Construction or Modification * * * * * * * Subchapter B – New Source Review Permits * * * * * * * Division 6 – Prevention of Significant Deterioration Review 30 TAC 116.160 Prevention of Significant Deterior ation Requirements No action under DocketNo. EPA-R06-OAR2006-0133. EPA will address this section in a separate action under Docket No. EPA-R06- OAR-2010-0620. * * * * * * *

2. Page 37 of the Appendix, is under 30 TAC 116.160 – Prevention of Significant Deterioration Requirements is revised to read as follows: Current SIP-Approved 30 TAC 116.160:

* * * * *

Revisions considered in this action:

* * * * * Proposed Action

• Disapproval of 30 TAC 116.160 was pr oposed September 23, 2009 (74 FR 48467)Addendum to the Technical Support Document Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); Preventi on for Significant

Deterioration Review (PSD), Nonattain ment NSR (NNSR) for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, NSR Reform, and a Standard Permit Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2006-0133

Final Action

• Based upon subsequent revision to 30 TAC 116.160, submitted July 16, 2010, EPA finds that TCEQ has corrected the de ficiencies identified in the Proposed Rule. In a separate actions under Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2010-0620, EPA is now approving the revisions to 30 TAC 116.160 as submitted February 1, 2006, and the revisions thereto submitted July 16, 2010. 3. On pages 37-40 of the Appendix, the Table – Annotation and Evaluation of §116.160 – is removed.
EXHIBIT 31.2
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Thomas C. Chesterman, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AradigmCorporation;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;
     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation, of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and
     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting. /s/ THOMAS C. CHESTERMANThomas C. Chesterman*Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer*
Dated: May 14, 2004
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.1


 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO ADVANCEPCS AMENDED AND RESTATED INCENTIVE STOCK OPTION PLAN

The AdvancePCS Amended and Restated Incentive Stock Option Plan (the "Plan") is
hereby amended, effective November 1, 2001, in the following respects:

1. The first sentence of Section 2 of the Plan is hereby amended to read as
follows: Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 4(g) hereof, options may
be granted by the Company from time to time to purchase up to an aggregate of
11,218,000 shares of the Company's authorized but unissued Common Stock;
provided, however, that the number of shares that may be granted to any employee
under the Plan over the term of the Plan shall not exceed 11,218,000.

2. In all other respects the Plan shall remain unmodified and in full force and
effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned officer of the Company has executed this
Amendment to be effective as provided above.

                                                     AdvancePCS

                                                     By: /s/ DAVID D. HALBERT
                                                        ------------------------
                                                     David D. Halbert Chairman
                                                     of the Board and Chief
                                                     Executive Officer