alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### PETROLEUM CASUALTY CO. v. WEBB.

No. 1596-6472.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section B.

March 18, 1936.

K. W. Gilmore and R. E. Seagler, both of Houston, Ben H. Powell, of Austin, and Philip Toclcer, of El Paso, for plaintiff in error.

Hertzberg & Kerchéville, of San Antonio, for defendant 'in error.

King, Wood & Morrow and H. E. Cox, all of Houston, and Lawther, Cox & Cram-er, of Dallas, amici curise.

TAYLOR, Commissioner.

Plaintiff in error, Petroleum Casualty Company, hereinafter referred to as insurer, appealed from an award of the Industrial Accident Board in favor of defendant in error, William C. Webb, the claimant.

The claimant filed a plea to the jurisdiction of the court alleging want of jurisdiction upon certain grounds not necessary to be stated. In his answer following the allegations that the injury received resulted in a hernia within the provisions of section 12b, article 8306, Revised Statutes 1925 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, claimant pointed out that he had not submitted, and ha.d not been ordered to submit, to an operation by any final order of the Industrial Accident Board. The trial court sustained the plea to the jurisdiction apparently upon other grounds, and dismissed the case. The Court of. Civil Appeals affirmed the judgment of dismissal. 54 S.W.(2d) 1066.

The case upon the face of the record is controlled by Tally v. Texas Employers’ Insurance Association (Tex.Com.App.) 48 S. W. (2d) 988, 990. It appears from the copy of the award set out in the transcript that it is substantially identical with the award made by the board in the Tally Case. Commissioner Leddy, speaking in that case for Section B of the Commission, after directing attention to the stipulations of the hernia section of the act, supra, says: “It is apparent from these provisions that there can be no final award in a hernia case until the board has definitely and finally fixed the specific compensation which the injured party is entitled to receive. The award which is sought to be appealed from in this case is merely a preliminary order.”

The only question discussed is whether the award, which is set out in full in the opinion, was final. The conclusion was reached that it was not, and that an appeal did not lie.

The recommendation of the Commission was that the judgments of the trial court and Court of Civil Appeals be reversed, and the cause dismissed.

In the recent case of Texas Employers’ Insurance Association v. Lemons (Tex.Sup.) 83 S.W.(2d) 658, Justice Critz, speaking for the Supreme Court in reversing and-remanding the case, directs attention to the decision in the Tally Case as a guide upon retrial. The question presented, it is apparent, has been settled. The trial court in the *237present case was without jurisdiction of the appeal, since the award made by the board is not final. It is not necessary to pass upon the other jurisdictional questions presented. The judgment of the trial court dismissing the case, and that of the Court of Civil Appeals affirming the dismissal, are affirmed.

Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court.
SCWC-20-0000142

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

________________________________________________________________

MICHAEL OLEKSA and ERICA OLEKSA,

Petitioners/Plaintiffs-Appellants,

vs.

DONALD C. CHAIKIN and JERRY SULLIVAN, 

Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.

________________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-20-0000142; CIV. NO. 2CC161000628)

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, and Eddins, JJ., and 

Circuit Judges Ashford and Kubota, 

assigned by reason of vacancies)

Petitioners/Plaintiffs-Appellants Michael and Erica 

Oleksa’s Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed on September 

13, 2023, is hereby rejected. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, November 8, 2023.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

/s/ James H. Ashford

/s/ Peter K. Kubota

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-20-0000142

08-NOV-2023

07:55 AM

Dkt. 13 ODAC
Fw: clean RIA chapters for OMB, last of 3
12/16/2011 08:04 PM

From: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US

To: Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov

Cc: Bill Maxwell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

This should complete the RIA transmittal ... preamble coming shortly.
May make the party after all, sociably late! :-)

bob

Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D. Leader, Energy Strategies Group U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards Sector Policies and Programs Division
Mail Code D243-01
RTP, NC 27711

Phone: (919) 541-1045 Cell: (919) 306-2290 Fax: (919) 541-5450

e-mail: wayland.robertj@epa.gov

********************************************************* DRAFT/Deliberative Document -- FOIA Exempt

********************************************************* ----- Forwarded by RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US on 12/16/2011 08:03 PM

----- From: Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Amanda CurryBrown/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,

Alex Barron/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Al McGartland/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, DavidA Evans/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Jim DeMocker/DC/USEPA/US@EPA
Date: 12/16/2011 08:00 PM Subject: clean RIA chapters for OMB, last of 3

Bob, this is the last email with the clean RIA pieces for Cortney. Thanks to Amy Lamson for the final helpChapter 5_HealthWelfareCobenefits_1216_FINAL.docx

MATS Title Page.doc

MATS Cover Page.doc

MATS Back Cover.doc

MATS TOC updated.doc

ROCIS_MATS_1216.xlsx

MATS TOC.doc
Exhibit
31.2
 
 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 
 I,
Stephen DelVecchia, certify that:
 
 1.           I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2008 of Hyperion Energy, Inc. (the
“Company”);
 
 2.           Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;
 
 3.           Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
 
 4.           The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
 
 (a)           Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
 
 (b)           Evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and
 
 (c)           Disclosed
in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financing
reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5.           The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a)           All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonable likely to
adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
 
 (b)           Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involved management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting.
  Hyperion Energy,
      Inc.Date:  November
      13, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Stephen
      DelvecchiaName: 
      Stephen DelvecchiaTitle: 
      Chief Financial Officer
# C_2022192EN.01008901.xml

| 11.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 192/89 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192/89

---

Notice for the attention of certain persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran

(2022/C 192/05)

The following information is brought to the attention of Mr. Kamran DANESHJOO (no. 27), person appearing in Annex II, Part I, to Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP (1) and in Annex IX, Part I, to Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 (2) concerning restrictive measures against Iran.

The following information is also brought to the attention of Brigadier-General Javad DARVISH-VAND, IRGC (no. 1), Rear Admiral Ali FADAVI (no. 2), Mr Parviz FATAH (no. 3), Brigadier-General Seyyed Mahdi FARAHI, IRGC (no. 4), Brigadier-General Mostafa Mohammad NAJJAR, IRGC (no. 7), Mr Rostam QASEMI (no. 10), Brigadier-General Ali SHAMSHIRI, IRGC (no. 12), Brigadier-General Ahmad VAHIDI, IRGC (no. 13), Mr Ali Ashraf NOURI (no. 17) and Mr Hojatoleslam Ali SAIDI (no. 18), persons appearing in Annex II, Part II, to Decision 2010/413/CFSP and in Annex IX, Part II, to Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran.

The Council intends to maintain the restrictive measures against the above-mentioned persons and entities with new statements of reasons. The persons and entities concerned are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the intended statement of reasons for their designation, by 18 May 2022, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| RELEX.1 |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

---

(1)  OJ L 88, 24.3.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 195, 27.7.2010, p. 39.

---
#### OWENS v. STATE.

No. 14304.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 22, 1931.

W. A. Hogan, of San Antonio, for appellant.

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

•CALHOUN, J.

Offense, failure to support and maintain child; penalty, six months in the county jail.

The record is before this court without either statement of facts or bills of exception, and nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

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.
#### BIRDWELL v. STATE.

No. 19455.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 3, 1938.

J. R. Bogard, of San Augustine, for appellant.

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

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

Assault with intent to murder is the offense ;, penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

Notice of appeal, given in open court and entered of record, is essential to the jurisdiction of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Article 827, C.C.P.; Tex.Jur., Vol. 4, pp. 114-116, §§ 76-78; Rose v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 111 S.W.2d 255; Shelbourne v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 298, 98 S.W.2d 192; Kinney v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 110 S.W.2d 63. The order appearing in the transcript in the present instance is nothing more than a docket entry, and is insufficient to show notice of appeal. The appeal must therefore be dismissed, and it is so ordered.
**Exhibit (23)**

 

[Letterhead of KPMG] 

 

**Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants**

 

The Board of Directors 

Potlatch Corporation: 

 

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Nos.333-17145, 333-42808, 33-00805, 33-28220, 33-54515, 333-28079, 333-74956, 33-30836, 333-12017, and 333-42806) on Form S-8 of Potlatch Corporation of our report dated January 23, 2004, with respect to the balance sheets of Potlatch Corporation andconsolidated subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2002 and the related statements of operations and comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2003, and therelated financial statement schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 2003, annual report on Form 10-K/A of Potlatch Corporation. 

 

KPMG LLP 

 

December 6, 2004
# C_2022417EN.01001501.xml

| 31.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 417/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 417/15

---

Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Amendment to public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 417/09)

| Member State | France |
| --- | --- |
| Route concerned | Rodez - Paris (Orly) |
| Original date of entry into force of the public service obligations | 1 June 1997 |
| Date of entry into force of the amendment(s) | 20 January 2024 |
| Address where the text and any information and/or documentation relating to the public service obligation can be obtained | Order of 20 September 2022 amending the public service obligations imposed on scheduled air services between Rodez and Paris (Orly)
  NOR : TREA2225691A
  https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr
  For further information, please contact:





  Directorate-General of Civil Aviation |
| DTA/SDS1 |
| 50 rue Henry Farman |
| 75 720 Paris Cedex 15 |
| FRANCE |
| Tel. +33 158094321 |

Member State

France

Route concerned

Rodez - Paris (Orly)

Original date of entry into force of the public service obligations

1 June 1997

Date of entry into force of the amendment(s)

20 January 2024

Address where the text and any information and/or documentation relating to the public service obligation can be obtained

Order of 20 September 2022 amending the public service obligations imposed on scheduled air services between Rodez and Paris (Orly)

NOR : TREA2225691A

https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr

For further information, please contact:

Directorate-General of Civil Aviation

DTA/SDS1

50 rue Henry Farman

75 720 Paris Cedex 15

FRANCE

Tel. +33 158094321

---
**Docket No. FAA -**  **2011 -**  **1091**
# C_2022464EN.01000601.xml

| 6.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 464/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 464/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10948 – STORA ENSO / DE JONG PAPIER HOLDING / DJV HOLDING)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 464/06)

On 28 November 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10948. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10948. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 24, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 77866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-21841]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2015-E-2079]


Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent 
Extension; BRAVECTO; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) published 
a notice in the Federal Register of February 12, 2018, for the 
determination of the regulatory review period for the animal drug 
BRAVECTO. In accordance with the Court's order in Nissan Chemical 
Corp., et al. v. FDA, et al., No. 22-01598 (D.D.C), this document 
revises the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of that notice by 
adjusting the start date of the testing phase for BRAVECTO. This notice 
supersedes the June 11, 2021, Federal Register document revising the 
February 12, 2018, notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory 
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 
51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of February 12, 2018 
(83 FR 6033), in FR Doc. 2018-02761, in the first column, the first two 
paragraphs under the section ``II. Determination of Regulatory Review 
Period,'' the following revision is made on page 6034:
    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for 
BRAVECTO is 1,548 days. Of this time, 1,510 days occurred during the 
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 38 days occurred 
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the 
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 512(j) of the Federal Food, 
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360b(j)) became effective: 
February 19, 2010. Pursuant to the Court's order in Nissan Chemical 
Corp., et al. v. FDA, et al., No. 22-01598 (D.D.C), the start date of 
the testing phase for BRAVECTO was February 19, 2010.

    Dated: September 19, 2024.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-21841 Filed 9-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
Dock.,?-^ 

9^) 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Drake Aerial Enterprises, LLC 

d/b/a Air America Aerial Ads and 

James Miller 

Complainant, 

City of Cleveland 

Respondent. 

FAA Docket No. 16-09-02 

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 

o 

Pursuant to 14 CFR § 16.29(b)(1), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has determined 

that the pleadings in this matter need to be supplemented by limited, additional information 

from the Respondent. Jhe Respondent is requested to fully answer the following questions 

within 10 days from the date of issuance of this request. 

Questions for the Respondent 

1- What is the City's process for reviewing and approving new aeronautical businesses at 

the Airport? If this process is discussed in the Airport's Minimum Standards, please 

provide a copy of this document. 

2- Describe the approval process the City used when reviewing the most recently accepted 

aeronautical business at the Airport. Was this business required to obtain the approval 

of the Director of Port Confrol? Was this business required to obtain approval of the 

Cleveland City Council? 

The parties to the Complaint should not consider that these questions necessarily represent all 

of the FAA's concerns regarding the issues raised in this matter. Furthermore, the parties 

should not assume that the sponsor's compliance status would turn, necessarily, on any one 

answer to a question. 

Randall S. Fiertz 

Director of Office of Airport Compliance 

and Field Operations 

AUG 2 7 2009 

Date 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 27, 2009 I caused to be placed in the United 

States mail (first class mail, postage paid) a true copy of the foregoing document addressed 

to: 

Rebecca E. Dupuis 

Nathan A. Hall 

Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP 

North Courthouse Square 

1000 Jackson Street 

Toledo, Ohio 43604 

(419) 241-9000 

Counsel for Complainant 

Edward W. Sauer 

Charles F. Donley, II 

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P. 

1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20004 

(202) 626-6641 

Counsel for Respondent 

Hand Delivered to: 

Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket 

Deanafa Brooks( 

Office of Airport Compliance and 

Field Operations
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 quarterly report of SUBMICRON TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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:





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.








Dated:  November 16, 2010





/s/ Charles Stidham





Name: Charles Stidham


Title:  Chief Executive Officer











Dated:  November 16, 2010





/s/ Charles Stidham





Name: Charles Stidham


Title:  Chief Financial Officer
# Official Journal C 108A/31 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 108A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5831 March 2015 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 108A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5831 March 2015

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2015/C 108 A/01 | Reserve lists — Open competition EPSO/AST-SC/01/14 — Assistants (SC 1/SC 2) in the secretarial field | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2015/C 108 A/01

Reserve lists — Open competition EPSO/AST-SC/01/14 — Assistants (SC 1/SC 2) in the secretarial field

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### FIDELITY & GUARANTY FIRE CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Roy STUBBLEFIELD et al., Appellees.

No. 3619.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

Feb. 21, 1940.

Rehearing Denied May 29, 1940.

Mantooth & Denman and Ned Shands, Jr., all of Lufkin, and John Plunket and Malone, Lipscomb, White & Seay, all of Dallas, for appellant.

Collins, Williams, Hatchell & Garrison, of Lufkin, for appellees.

WALKER, Chief Justice.

This is a case of county court jurisdiction; judgment affirmed without written opinion. Texas & N. O. R. R. Co. v. Futch, Tex.Civ.App., 127 S.W.2d 1040.

Affirmed.