alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 206 (Thursday, October 24, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 84925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24680]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4829-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2024-0001]


South Carolina; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of South Carolina (FEMA-4829-DR), dated September 29, 
2024, and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued October 5, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of South Carolina is hereby amended to include the 
following area among those areas determined to have been adversely 
affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of September 29, 2024.

    Hampton County for Individual Assistance.
    Hampton County for debris removal and emergency protective 
measures (Categories A and B), including direct federal assistance 
under the Public Assistance program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2024-24680 Filed 10-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 10.201
                                   DEMAND NOTE

$440,000.00                                                  New York, New York
                                                             August 28, 2001

        FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, Wilshire Technologies, Inc. a
California corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Borrower"), hereby
unconditionally PROMISES TO PAY to the order to TRILON DOMINION PARTNERS, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company ("Lender"), at 245 Park Avenue, 28th Floor,
New York, NY 10167, or at such other place as the holder of this Demand Note may
designate from time to time in writing, in lawful money of the United States of
America and in immediately available funds, the principal amount of Four Hundred
Forty Thousand and 00/100, DOLLARS ($440,000.00), together with interest on the
unpaid principal amount of this Demand Note outstanding from time to time from
the date hereof, at a rate per annum equal to the Prime rate of interest plus
3.0%, or the highest rate permitted by law, whichever shall be less.

        The principal amount of the indebtedness evidenced hereby shall be
payable on demand. Interest thereon shall be paid when principal is paid from
the date hereof until such principal amount is paid in full at such interest
rate as specified above. Following failure to pay on demand, Borrower agrees to
pay interest on any overdue payment of principal at a rate per annum equal to
the stated interest rate plus 5%, or the highest rate permitted by law,
whichever shall be less. All interest calculations shall be computed on the
basis of a 360 day year.

        Demand, presentment, protest and notice of nonpayment and protest are
hereby waived by Borrower.

        Borrower shall have no right to make any off-set against or deduct from
any payment due under this Demand Note.

        Principal and interest may be prepaid at any time without penalty.

        This Demand Note may not be changed orally, but only by an agreement in
writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement of such change is
sought.

        All covenants of Borrower in this Demand Note and all rights of the
holder under this Demand Note shall bind Borrower and its successors and
assigns, and all such covenants and rights shall inure to the benefit of the
holder of this Demand Note and its successors and assigns.

        This Demand Note has been delivered and accepted at New York, New York
and shall be interpreted, governed by, and construed in accordance with, the
laws of the State of New York.

                                            Wilshire Technologies, Inc.


                                            By: /s/Kathleen Terry
                                                --------------------------------
                                            Name:  Kathleen E. Terry
                                            Title:Chief Financial Officer
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________

NO. 09
- 14
- 00 498
- CV



### _________________
IN RE CITY OF BEAUMONT, TEXAS

________________________________________________________________________ Original Proceeding

________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION The City of Beaumont, Texas seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the trial court to rule on a plea to the jurisdiction before trial on the merits. Generally, a trial court deciding a plea to the jurisdiction has discretion to decide “whether the jurisdictio nal determination should be made at a preliminary hearing or await a fuller development of the case, mindful that this determination must be made as soon as practicable. ” Tex. Dep’t of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda , 1 33 S.W.3d 217, 227 (Tex. 2004); see also Bland Indep. School Dist. v. Blue , 34 S.W.3d 547, 554 (Tex. 2000).2 After reviewing the records and after considering the arguments presented by r elator and by the real party in interest, Justin Jackson, we conclude that the trial court acted within its discretion in deciding to allow further development of the facts of the case before ruling on the plea to the jurisdiction. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on November 26, 2014 Opinion Delivered December 18, 2014 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
# Missouri Court of Appeals

Southern District

MAY 23, 2016

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b).

1. Case No. SD33919

Re: HORST SABLA,

Movant-Appellant,

vs. STATE OF MISSOURI,

Respondent-Respondent.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 206 (Thursday, October 24, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 84914-84915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24697]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2024-0001]


Notice of Adjustment of Countywide Per Capita Impact Indicator

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: FEMA gives notice that the countywide per capita impact 
indicator under the Public Assistance program for disasters with an 
incident start date on or after October 1, 2024, will be increased.

DATES: This adjustment applies to major disasters with an incident 
start date on or after October 1, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tod Wells, Recovery Directorate, 
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 
20472, (202) 646-3834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In assessing damages for area designations 
under 44 CFR 206.40(b), FEMA uses a countywide per capita indicator to 
evaluate the impact of the disaster at the county level. FEMA will 
adjust the countywide per capita impact indicator under the Public 
Assistance program to reflect annual changes in the Consumer Price 
Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Department of Labor.
    FEMA gives notice of an increase in the countywide per capita 
impact

[[Page 84915]]

indicator to $4.72 for all disasters with an incident start date on or 
after October 1, 2024.
    FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price 
Index for All Urban Consumers of 2.5 percent for the 12-month period 
that ended in August 2024. The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. 
Department of Labor released the information on September 11, 2024.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Disaster 
Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters).

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2024-24697 Filed 10-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 356 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 356

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain works, 
facilities, and titles of the Gila Project, and designated lands within 
 or adjacent to the Gila Project, to the Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and 
               Drainage District, and for other purposes.

    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 referred to as the ``Wellton-Mohawk Transfer Act''.

SEC. 2. TRANSFER.

    The Secretary of the Interior (``Secretary'') is authorized to 
carry out the terms of the Memorandum of Agreement No. 8-AA-34-WAO14 
(``Agreement'') dated July 10, 1998 between the Secretary and the 
Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and Drainage District (``District'') 
providing for the transfer of works, facilities, and lands to the 
District, including conveyance of Acquired Lands, Public Lands, and 
Withdrawn Lands, as defined in the Agreement.

SEC. 3. WATER AND POWER CONTRACTS.

    Notwithstanding the transfer, the Secretary and the Secretary of 
Energy shall provide for and deliver Colorado River water and Parker-
Davis Project Priority Use Power to the District in accordance with the 
terms of existing contracts with the District, including any amendments 
or supplements thereto or extensions thereof and as provided under 
section 2 of the Agreement.

SEC. 4. SAVINGS.

    Nothing in this Act shall affect any obligations under the Colorado 
River Basin Salinity Control Act (Public Law 93-320, 43 U.S.C. 1571).

SEC. 5. REPORT.

    If transfer of works, facilities, and lands pursuant to the 
Agreement has not occurred by July 1, 2000, the Secretary shall report 
on the status of the transfer as provided in section 5 of the 
Agreement.

SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION.

    There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.

            Passed the Senate March 25, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
106th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 356

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain works, 
facilities, and titles of the Gila Project, and designated lands within 
 or adjacent to the Gila Project, to the Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and 
               Drainage District, and for other purposes.
```
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Christopher G. Kenber, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Annual Report of hi/fn, inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September
30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual
Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of hi/fn, inc..

By: /s/ CHRISTOPHER G. KENBER

Name: Christopher G. Kenber
Title: Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 21

                                  SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

Name                                    Jurisdiction of Organization                     Names under which
----                                    ----------------------------                     it Does Business
                                                                                         ----------------
<S>                                          <C>                                              <C>
S1, Inc.                                       Kentucky                                       S1

S1 Holdings, LLC                               Delaware

S1 Europe Holdings C.V.A.                      Belgium

Edify Corporation                              Delaware

FICS Group N.V.                                Belgium

VerticalOne Corporation                        Delaware

Austin Acquisition Corporation                 Texas

Delta Acquisitions Corporation                 Delaware

Temple Acquisition Corporation                 Delaware

S1 UK Ltd.                                     United Kingdom
</TABLE>


                                     - 20 -
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6077

DONTEZ LAMONT SIMUEL,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 versus

ROBY LEE; R. A. THOMPSON; SHERRY MCFEATERS;

LIEUTENANT MONROE; SERGEANT UPTON; PHYSICIAN

BOWE,

 Defendants - Appellees,

 and

DOCTOR CIBUB,

 Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior

District Judge. (5:03-ct-00350-F)

Submitted: July 6, 2007 Decided: July 27, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dontez Lamont Simuel, Appellant Pro Se. James Philip Allen, NORTH

CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Dana
- 2 -

Hefter Davis, YOUNG, MOORE & HENDERSON, PA, Raleigh, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Dontez Lamont Simuel appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Simuel v. Lee, No.

5:03-ct-00350-F (E.D.N.C. Dec. 15, 2006). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
----

|   | Exhibit      32.1 |
|--------|-------------------|

|   | CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO |
|--------|--------------------------------|

|   | 18      U.S.C. § 1350 |
|--------|----------------------------|

|   | AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO |
|--------|-----------------------------|

|   | SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002 |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------|

| (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. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED OCTOBER 30, 2015

NO. 03-15-00619-CV

Keith Wiley, Appellant

v.

Hocutt, Inc., Appellee

APPEAL FROM 201ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES PEMBERTON AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the order signed by the district court on September 11, 2015. Having 

reviewed the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. Therefore, the 

Court dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. The appellant shall pay all costs relating to 

this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
#### Halvorson, Appellant, vs. Connors, Respondent.

*October 12*

November *16, 1948.*

For the appellant there was a brief by *Doar & Knowles*of New Richmond, and oral argument by *W. T. Doar.*

*Earl Nelton*of Balsam Lake, for the respondent.

Fairchild, J.

The members of the court are equally divided upon this appeal. Mr. Justice Wickhem, Mr. Justice Hughes, and Mr. Justice Martin are of the opinion that' a new trial should be granted. Mr. Chief Justice Rosenberry, Mr. Justice Fritz, and the writer are of the opinion that the order should be reversed and judgment entered for plaintiff.

Under the rule the order appealed from is affirmed.

*By the Court.*— Order affirmed.

Broadfoot, J., took no part.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                    5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NETWORK-1 SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                    JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                      DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                              3,023,000
<SECURITIES>                                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                         105,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                           40,000
<INVENTORY>                                             2,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    3,331,000
<PP&E>                                                506,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                         81,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      4,596,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 924,000
<BONDS>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                             5,000
<COMMON>                                               50,000
<OTHER-SE>                                          2,114,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        4,596,000
<SALES>                                               260,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      394,000
<CGS>                                                  95,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       1,081,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    6,006,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       10,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (6,561,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (6,561,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       (385,000)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (6,946,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                             (1.92)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           (1.92)



</TABLE>
#### James A. Pappas, Appellant, v 31-08 Café Concerto, Inc., Defendant. Emanuel M. Dallaris, Nonparty Respondent.

[773 NYS2d 108]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the *453plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated August 1, 2002, as denied that branch of his motion which was for leave to serve an amended complaint pursuant to CPLR 3025 (b) adding Emanuel Michael Dallaris as a defendant.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

“[T]he relation back doctrine allows a claim asserted against a defendant in an amended filing to relate back to claims previously asserted against a codefendant for Statute of Limitations purposes where the two defendants are ‘united in interest’ ” *(Buran v Coupal,*87 NY2d 173, 177 [1995]; *see Poulard v Papamihlopoulos,*254 AD2d 266, 267 [1998]). The doctrine requires the plaintiff to establish that “(1) both claims arose out of the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence, (2) the new party is united in interest with the original defendant, and by reason of that relationship can be charged with such notice of the institution of the action that the new party will not be prejudiced in maintaining its defense on the merits by the delayed, otherwise stale, commencement, and (3) the new party knew or should have known that, but for a mistake by the plaintiff as to the identity of the proper parties, the action would have been brought against that party as well” *(Austin v Interfaith Med. Ctr.,*264 AD2d 702, 703 [1999]; *see Buran v Coupal, supra*at 178; *Mondello v New York Blood Ctr.—Greater N.Y. Blood Program,*80 NY2d 219, 226 [1992]). The first two conditions have been satisfied in this case.

New York law requires merely mistake—not excusable mistake—on the part of the plaintiff seeking the benefit of the relation-back doctrine *(see Buran v Coupal, supra*at 179; *Lopes v Interstate Concrete,*265 AD2d 383, 384 [1999]; *State of New York v Gruzen Partnership,*239 AD2d 735, *736*[1997]). However, where the party suing “intentionally decides not to assert a claim against a party known to be potentially liable, there has been no mistake and the [party suing] should not be given a second opportunity to assert that claim after the limitations period has expired” *(Buran v Coupal, supra*at 181). The plaintiff s own evidence belied his assertion that the failure to name Emanuel Michael Dallaris as a defendant within the statute of limitations was the result of mistake or the inability of the plaintiff to properly identify him. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for leave to serve an amended complaint pursuant to CPLR 3025 (b) adding Emanuel Michael Dallaris as a defendant. Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Crane and Rivera, JJ., concur.