alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 3093

To require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to roll back the

wholesale price of electric energy sold in the Western System Coordinating Council, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 21, 2000

Mrs. BOXER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to

roll back the wholesale price of electric energy sold in

the Western System Coordinating Council, 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 ‘‘Halt Electricity Price5 gouging in San Diego Act’’ or ‘‘HELP San Diego Act’’.
2

•S 3093 IS

1 SEC. 2. ROLL BACK OF WHOLESALE PRICE FOR ELEC2 TRICITY IN WESTERN MARKET.

3 (a) CEILING.—The Federal Energy Regulatory Com4 mission shall, by not later than November 30, 2000, issue

5 an order establishing the maximum price for electricity

6 sold at wholesale subject to the jurisdiction of the Commis7 sion under the Federal Power Act in the Western System

8 Coordinating Council after June 1, 2000.

9 (b) MAXIMUM PRICE.—For purposes of this Act, the

10 maximum price established by the Federal Energy Regu11 latory Commission shall be the lesser of—

12 (1) an average of the wholesale price for electric

13 energy sold in the Western System Coordinating

14 Council in the three-year period immediately before

15 June 1, 2000, or

16 (2) a price based on a cost-based formula for

17 wholesale rates established in accordance with Part

18 II of the Federal Power Act.

19 (c) REFUND.—Any person selling electric energy at

20 wholesale subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission

21 under the Federal Power Act in the Western System Co22 ordinating Council after June 1, 2000, who has received

23 in excess of the maximum price for such energy shall

24 promptly refund to the purchaser the full amount of such

25 excess. Such purchaser shall promptly transfer such re26 fund to the ultimate consumers of such electric energy,
3

•S 3093 IS

1 except that if such purchaser resold the electric energy at

2 wholesale to any other wholesale purchaser, each such

3 wholesale purchaser shall refund such amount to the per4 son or persons who purchased such electric energy from

5 such wholesale purchaser.

6 (d) PENALTIES.—Any person who violates any re7 quirement of this Act shall be subject to civil penalties

8 equal to three times the value of the amount involved in

9 such violation. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commis10 sion shall assess such penalties, after notice and oppor11 tunity for public hearing, in accordance with the same pro12 visions as are applicable under section 31(d) of the Fed13 eral Power Act in the case of civil penalties assessed under

14 such section 31.

15 (e) SEPARABILITY.—If any provision of this Act is

16 found to be unenforceable or invalid, no other provision

17 of this Act shall be affected thereby.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 203 (Monday, October 21, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 84233]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24180]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #20711 and #20712; GEORGIA Disaster Number GA-
20013]


Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the 
State of Georgia

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 6.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Georgia (FEMA-4830-DR), dated 09/30/
2024.
    Incident: Hurricane Helene.
    Incident Period: 09/24/2024 and continuing.

DATES: Issued on 10/14/2024.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/29/2024.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/30/2025.

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: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for the State of Georgia, dated 09/30/2024, is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): McIntosh.
Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only): All counties 
contiguous to the above-named county have been previously declared.

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Rafaela Monchek,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & 
Resilience.
[FR Doc. 2024-24180 Filed 10-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS OF MARKER INTERNATIONAL FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS      
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                       JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                      94        
<SECURITIES>                             2,486        
<RECEIVABLES>                           27,373        
<ALLOWANCES>                            (1,462)       
<INVENTORY>                             53,606        
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        87,073        
<PP&E>                                  37,026        
<DEPRECIATION>                         (18,174)       
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         115,587        
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   87,646        
<BONDS>                                 10,000        
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0        
<PREFERRED>                                  0        
<COMMON>                                   111        
<OTHER-SE>                               6,121        
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           115,587
<SALES>                                  3,010
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         3,010
<CGS>                                    1,364
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            7,046
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          (489)     
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0        
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       1,495
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (6,406)       
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0        
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (6,354)
<DISCONTINUED>                               0        
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0        
<CHANGES>                                    0        
<NET-INCOME>                            (6,354)      
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            (0.57)
<EPS-DILUTED>                            (0.57)
        

</TABLE>
**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 Vangent, Inc.(the ‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 28,2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the ‘‘Report’’), I, Christine M. Bailey, Senior Vice President andChief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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. |

 

 
|                  | /s/ Christine M.  Bailey                           |
|-----------------------|----------------------------------------------------|
| August 11,  2008 |   Christine M. Bailey                    |
|                  | Senior Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

1

----
Return to Agency Reports Required by Statue
**Aviation Economic Orders**
#### Palmer, Plaintiff in error, vs. The State, Defendant in error.

*September 17*

October *12, 1948.*

*430
      *Chester J. Niebler*of Milwaukee, for the plaintiff in error.

For the defendant in error there was a brief by the *Attorney General, William A. Plats,*assistant attorney general, and *Robert D. Daniel,*district attorney of Rock county, and oral argument by *Mr. Plats, Mr. Daniel,*and *Mr. Prank Kinast,*assistant district attorney.

Wickhem, J.

Defendant contends that it was an abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court to permit withdrawal of a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity because the judge who tried the case had no knowledge of the facts except such as was furnished by a transcript of the preliminary examination which consisted principally of evidence .by the complaining witness, and that therefore the trial court had no basis for coming to a judgment whether the plea should be permitted to be withdrawn. It is also claimed that a jury having been waived the trial court acted as a jury and as such operated under the mistaken view that the uncorroborated story of the complaining witness must be accepted as true.

We find no specific error in this record. Everything that was done before the trial court was by stipulation between *431counsel and although there was a plea of not guilty no attempt was made by defendant to contradict the testimony on the preliminary examination. We have, however, after a careful consideration of t'he rather unusual history of this prosecution, determined to order a discretionary reversal under sec. 251.09, Stats.

The trial court which sentenced defendant heard no testimony and knew nothing of the report by the four doctors that defendant was legally irresponsible at the time of the crime. This evidence was technically immaterial after the withdrawal of the plea of insanity. It was unsworn and was in the form of a bare conclusion without the disclosure of details. Further than this, it had not been subjected to the test of cross-examination. Nevertheless, being the unanimous determination by 'doctors appointed both by the state and the defense it should, if it had been brought to the attention of the trial court, have aroused concern and inquiry over permitting withdrawal of the plea of insanity, and in any case, would suggest further inquiry to fix the proper penalty. We are persuaded that such an inquiry would have been made had a single judge presided in this matter. For all we know such an inquiry might have disclosed that the withdrawal of the plea was not improvident and under the peculiar circumstances we cannot say that there was error in not ordering such an inquiry. However, the situation arouses our grave concern. We are persuaded that there is strong likelihood that justice may have miscarried and conclude, that the case should be retried. The state should be permitted to. file such amendment to the information as it may deem proper and defendant to plead to the original or amended information.

*By the Court.*— Judgment reversed, and cause remanded with directions to grant a new trial in accordance with this opinion.

Martin, J., took no part.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 249 (Friday, December 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 76474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31251]

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

 Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Friday January 25, 2013.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

Matters To Be Considered

    Surveillance and Enforcement Matters. In the event that the times 
or dates of these or any future meetings change, an announcement of the 
change, along with the new time and place of the meeting will be posted 
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.cftc.gov.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012-31251 Filed 12-26-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-155-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
Order entered December 1, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-01427-CV

TROY D. SHIELDS, JR., Appellant

V.

PATRICIA K. SHIELDS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-04278-C

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s November 23, 2020 motion for extension of 

time to file his corrected opening brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the 

corrected opening brief received November 10, 2020 filed as of the date of this 

order. 

Appellee’s brief shall be filed no later than December 31, 2020.

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE
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





The
undersigned, William R. Short, the Chief Executive Officer of Touchmark
Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





1.        The
quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30,
2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the
“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.        The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




Date: November
      16, 2009
              By:
              /s/ William R. ShortWilliam
      R. ShortChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1343 

KA 10-00384 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHAZERAE M. BURNICE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JANE I. YOON OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (AMANDA L. DREHER OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Patricia D.

Marks, J.), rendered September 14, 2009. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously reversed on the law, the plea is vacated, that part of the

motion seeking to suppress showup identification testimony with

respect to defendant is granted and the matter is remitted to Monroe

County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon a guilty

plea, of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [2]),

defendant contends that County Court erred in refusing to suppress

showup identification testimony with respect to him. We agree. 

“Showup identifications are disfavored, since they are suggestive by

their very nature” (People v Ortiz, 90 NY2d 533, 537; see People v

Johnson, 81 NY2d 828, 831). Here, the showup identification procedure

was conducted in the parking lot of a police station, approximately 90

minutes after the occurrence of the crime, while defendant was

handcuffed and while uniformed police officers and ambulance personnel

were in the parking lot. The totality of the circumstances of this

showup identification procedure presses judicial tolerance beyond its

limits (cf. People v Duuvon, 77 NY2d 541, 545; People v Hunt, 277 AD2d

911, 911-912), and we conclude under the facts and circumstances of

this case that the showup identification procedure was infirm (cf.

Duuvon, 77 NY2d at 544). 

Inasmuch as the witness who identified defendant at the showup

identification procedure did not testify at the Wade hearing, the

People did not establish that such witness had an independent basis

for his in-court identification of defendant (see People v Hill, 53

AD3d 1151, 1151). We thus conclude that defendant is entitled to a

new Wade hearing on that issue (see id. at 1151-1152; see generally
-2- 1343 

KA 10-00384 

People v Burts, 78 NY2d 20, 22-23). We therefore reverse the judgment

and, because the motion was made by defendant and his codefendant, we

grant only that part of the motion with respect to defendant and remit

the matter to County Court for further proceedings, including a new

Wade hearing on the issue whether the witness has an independent basis

for his in-court identification of defendant, if the People are so

advised. In light of our determination, we do not address defendant’s

remaining contention.

Entered: January 3, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
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   We the undersigned, Barry J. Lucas, President (Principal Executive Officer) and Michael J. Malbourne, Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) of Elray Resources, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:  (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of § 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.  /s/Barry J. Lucas Barry J. Lucas President (Principal Executive Officer)  /s/Michael J. Malbourne Michael J. Malbourne 
Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)  May 15, 2009  A signed original of this written statement required by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002has 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.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, August 07, 2018.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, August 07, 2018

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A18I0262. NATHANIEL MCCORD v. CITY OF ATLANTA .

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

2016CV282031
Production of [ ] and

Production of PMN Substances

Sanitized
EXHIBIT 4.7


                                SECOND AMENDMENT
                                ----------------
                                       OF
                                       --
                          CHICAGO TRIBUNE TAX DEFERRED
                          ----------------------------
                         INVESTMENT PLAN FOR MACHINISTS
                         ------------------------------


                  WHEREAS, effective as of January1, 1986, and pursuant to an
agreement between Chicago Tribune Company (the "Company") and the International
Association of Machinists, Local 126, the Company established the Chicago
Tribune Tax Deferred Investment Plan For Machinists (the "Plan"); and

                  WHEREAS, the Plan was previously amended and further amendment
of the Plan is now considered desirable;

                  NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue and in exercise of the power
reserved to the Company by Section 10.1 of the Plan, the Plan be and it hereby
is amended, effective January1, 1998, as follows:

                  1.       By substituting the following for Section 7.3 of
the Plan:

         "7.3     Payment of Benefits

                  When a Participant or a Beneficiary of a deceased Participant
         becomes entitled to a distribution pursuant to Section 7.1 the amount
         available for distribution shall be paid in a lump sum consisting of
         one or more payments; provided, that all of such payments shall be made
         within one taxable year of the recipient; provided further if a
         Participant's vested account balance at the time of distribution (or
         any prior distribution) exceeds $5,000, distribution shall not be made
         to the Participant before he attains age 65 unless he consents
         thereto."

                  2.       By substituting "$5,000" for "$3,500" wherever the
latter appears in Section 7.4 of the Plan.
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

The
undersigned, Robert D. Koncerak, the Chief Financial Officer of Touchmark Bancshares, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

1. The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  |                                             
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------
|Date: August 13, 2009 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Robert D. Koncerak
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | Robert D. Koncerak                          
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | Chief Financial Officer                     
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)