alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

76442 

Vol. 89, No. 181 

Wednesday, September 18, 2024 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2021–0544; FRL–12175– 

03–R5] 

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Regional 

Haze Plan for the Second 

Implementation Period; Extension of 

Comment Period 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

public comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is extending the comment 

period for a proposed rule published 

August 30, 2024. The current comment 

period for the proposed rule was set to 

end on September 30, 2024. In response 

to a request in a public comment, EPA 

is extending the comment period for the 

proposed action to October 15, 2024. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published on August 30, 

2024, at 89 FR 71124 is extended. 

Comments must be received on or 

before October 15, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2021–0544 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

langman.michael@epa.gov. Additional 

instructions to comment can be found in 

the notice of proposed rulemaking 

published August 30, 2024 (89 FR 

71124). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alisa Liu, Air and Radiation Division 

(AR–18J), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, 

(312) 886–6524, liu.alisa@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

21, 2024, EPA proposed to approve the 

Regional Haze State Implementation 

Plan revision submitted by the Ohio 

Environmental Protection Agency on 

July 30, 2021, as satisfying applicable 

requirements under the Clean Air Act 

and EPA’s Regional Haze Rule for the 

program’s second implementation 

period. In response to a request in a 

public comment, EPA is extending the 

comment period for 15 days. 

Dated: September 13, 2024. 

Debra Shore, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2024–21267 Filed 9–17–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT BENITO TORRES, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-595 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed October 17, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Manatee County; Edward Nicholas, Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Bolender v. State, 658 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 1995); Cassoday v. State, 237 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 1970); Coughlin v. State, 932 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (en banc); Shortridge v. State, 884 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Golden v. State, 870 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Carr v. State, 495 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

LaROSE, C.J., and MORRIS and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), each of theundersigned officers of Maxim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “**Company**”), hereby certifies that to thebest of his knowledge:

 

**1.****            **TheCompany’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2005, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the “**Periodic Report**”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and

 

**2.****            **Theinformation contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF,**eachof the undersigned has set his hands hereto as of the 5th day of August, 2005.

 

 
|   | /s/ Larry G. Stambaugh                       |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Larry G. Stambaugh, Chief Executive  Officer |
|   |                                         |
|   |                                         |
|   | /s/ John D. Prunty                           |   |
|   | John D. Prunty, Chief Financial Officer      |

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission(**“SEC”**) or its staff upon request.

 

This certification “accompanies” the Form 10-Q to which itrelates, is not deemed filed with the SEC and is not to be incorporated byreference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, asamended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether madebefore or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any generalincorporation language contained in such filing.

 

----
#### COTHREN v. STATE.

No. 20984.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 22, 1940.

J. Mitch Johnson, of San Saba, for appellant.

G. A. Walters, Co. Atty., of San Saba, and Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the County-Court of San Saba County for violation of the liquor laws and was fined $300 by a jury verdict. From the judgment based on this verdict he appeals.

It is alleged in the information in the case that appellant sold one pint of whiskey and three cans of beer to John M. Henderson. It is further alleged that he was convicted in Cause No. 1744 in the County Court of San Saba County on November 30, 1938, of a similar offense and upon this allegation and proof of conviction and final judgment the court submitted the evidence to the jury for the purpose of enabling them to enhance the penalty.

It is shown by bill of exception number one that on a previous day appellant had been convicted of another sale of whiskey and that the complaint and information contained a clause alleging the same sale, conviction and final judgment in Cause No. 1744, San Saba County, on November 30, 1938, and the prosecution obtained against appellant an enhanced penalty because of this same former conviction. The submission of this evidence to the jury was timely objected to and here presented as error.

The same conviction cannot be twice used for the purpose of enhancing a penalty. This has been so frequently held by this court and in recent cases that we do not consider it necessary to here discuss the matter or cite authorities.

The other errors complained of will probably not arise upon another trial and for that reason are not considered.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and remanded for a new trial.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-03-00219-CR

Robert Keith Bricker, Jr., Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 53186, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

In March 2002, appellant Robert Keith Bricker, Jr., pleaded guilty to burglary. S ee

Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 30.02 (West 2003). He was convicted by the court and sentenced to ten years

in prison, but imposition of sentence was suspended and he was placed on community supervision.

In April 2003, appellant pleaded true to the allegations made in the State’s motion to revoke. The

court revoked supervision and imposed the ten-year sentence.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is

frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of A nders v. California

, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no

arguable grounds to be advanced. S ee also Penson v. Ohio

, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State

, 573

S. W .2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State

, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);

Jackson v. State

, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State

, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.2

Crim. App. 1969). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant, who was advised of his

right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the r ecord and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel’s

motion to withdraw is granted.

The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

__________________________________________

Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Kidd, Patterson and Puryear

Affirmed

Filed: December 11, 2003

Do Not Publish
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2808 

To prohibit U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from negotiating 

contracts with private detention companies that require a minimum number of immigration detention beds, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 17, 2015 

Mr. DEUTCH (for himself, Mr. FOSTER, and Mr. SMITH of Washington) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

from negotiating contracts with private detention companies that require a minimum number of immigration 

detention beds, 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 ‘‘Protecting Taxpayers 

5 and Communities from Local Detention Quotas Act’’. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2808 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN PROVISIONS IN U.S. IM2 MIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT 

3 CONTRACTS REQUIRING A MINIMUM NUM4 BER OF IMMIGRATION DETENTION BEDS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi6 sion of law, the Assistant Secretary of U.S. Immigration 

7 and Customs Enforcement may not negotiate with a pri8 vate detention company a contract that contains any pro9 vision relating to a guaranteed minimum number of immi10 gration detention beds at any specific facility. The prohibi11 tion described in this subsection shall also apply in the 

12 case of any— 

13 (1) negotiation relating to the extension of any 

14 such contract; or 

15 (2) renegotiation of any such contract. 

16 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall take effect 

17 and apply with respect to any negotiation or renegotiation 

18 described in subsection (a) that begins on or after the date 

19 of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
CONSENT OF BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

P & F Industries, Inc.
Farmingdale, New York

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Form S-8 Registration
Statement filed on February 18, 1997 of our report dated March 12, 1999,
relating to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of P & F
Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries appearing in the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998.

We also consent to the reference to us under the caption "Experts" in the Form
S-8 Registration Statement.


/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP

BDO Seidman, LLP

New York, New York
March 12, 1999
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 ValCom, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB/A for  the  quarter  ended  June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof  (the  "Report"),  I,  Steven  Cantrock,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  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 and 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.

A signed original of this written statement  required  by  Section 906 has been
provided to ValCom, Inc. and will be retained by ValCom, Inc.  and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

October 3, 2006


/s/ Steven Cantrock
---------------------------
Steven Cantrock
Chief Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2022280EN.01002601.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 21.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 280/26 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10804 – KKR / CONTOURGLOBAL)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 280/08)

1.

On 14 July 2022, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2022280EN.01002601-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | KKR & Co. Inc. (‘KKR’, USA), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | ContourGlobal plc (‘ContourGlobal’, UK). |

KKR will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of ContourGlobal.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | KKR is a global investment firm, offering alternative asset management and capital markets and insurance solutions, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | ContourGlobal acquires and develops wholesale power generation assets, operating 138 power plants across 20 countries, including in the EU in Austria, Bulgaria, France, Italy, Romania, Slovakia and Spain. |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2022280EN.01002601-E0002) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.10804 – KKR / CONTOURGLOBAL

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2022280EN.01002601-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2022280EN.01002601-E0002)  [OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2837 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2837

    To direct the Joint Committee on the Library to accept a statue 
depicting Pierre L'Enfant from the District of Columbia and to provide 
 for the permanent display of the statue in the United States Capitol.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 18, 2015

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To direct the Joint Committee on the Library to accept a statue 
depicting Pierre L'Enfant from the District of Columbia and to provide 
 for the permanent display of the statue in the United States Capitol.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) Pierre L'Enfant was born in France in 1754, and 
        traveled to the United States to serve with the United States 
        in the Revolutionary War.
            (2) Pierre L'Enfant was an engineer and architect, and in 
        1791 he developed the unique and exceptional design for the 
        Nation's capital that laid the framework for the modern-day 
        District of Columbia that is followed and maintained until 
        today.
            (3) L'Enfant's remarkable design envisioned a 
        distinguishable federal and residential city with diagonal 
        streets propelling from Congress and the President's home, 
        beautiful boulevards on local streets and neighborhoods, and 
        open spaces for monuments, memorials, and historical 
        structures, all of which largely remain intact, protected as a 
        historical treasure.
            (4) The United States Capitol does not currently 
        appropriately recognize the contributions of Pierre L'Enfant.

SEC. 2. ACCEPTANCE OF STATUE OF PIERRE L'ENFANT FOR PLACEMENT IN UNITED 
              STATES CAPITOL.

    (a) Acceptance.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Joint Committee on the Library shall accept 
from the District of Columbia the donation of a statue depicting Pierre 
L'Enfant, subject to the terms and conditions that the Joint Committee 
considers appropriate.
    (b) Placement.--The Joint Committee shall place the statue accepted 
under subsection (a) in a suitable permanent location in the United 
States Capitol.
                                 <all>
```
**RemedyTemp, Inc.**
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
I, Greg Palmer, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of RemedyTemp, Inc.; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: February 7, 2005   /s/ Greg D. Palmer  Greg D. Palmer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SCPIE HOLDINGS INC. FOR THE SIX MONTH
PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           687,530
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      20,440
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 740,109
<CASH>                                           9,534
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                             581
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 839,399
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                      0
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             24,751
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 461,309
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                            2,944
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                     335,772
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   839,399
<PREMIUMS>                                      69,111
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             21,209
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                               3,187
<OTHER-INCOME>                                     289
<BENEFITS>                                      63,744
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                          0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             8,583
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 21,469
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,344
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             16,125
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    16,125
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 440,301
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                             90,698
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                               26,954
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                               1,123
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                58,351
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                444,571
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                         26,954
        

</TABLE>