alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 51 (Tuesday, March 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13957-13958]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06040]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


MyVA Federal Advisory Committee Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, that the MyVA Advisory 
Committee (MVAC) will meet April 14 and 15, 2015 at the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, Board of Veterans' Appeals Conference Room, 425 I 
Street NW., 4th Floor,

[[Page 13958]]

Room 4E.400, Washington, DC. The sessions will begin at 8:30 a.m. each 
day. On Tuesday, April 14 the session ends at 4:30 p.m., and ends at 
1:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 15. The meeting is open to the public.
    The purpose of the Committee is to advise the Secretary, through 
the Executive Director, My VA Task Force Office, regarding the My VA 
initiative and VA's ability to rebuild trust with Veterans and other 
stakeholders, improve service delivery with a focus on Veteran 
outcomes, and set the course for longer-term excellence and reform of 
the VA.
    On April 14, agenda topics will include: An overview of VA, the 
Committee's charge, and the MyVA work conducted to date. Information 
with be provided on the five key MyVA work streams--Veteran Experience 
(explaining the research conducted to understand the Veteran's 
experience and needs), People and Culture, Support Services Excellence 
(such as information technology and human resources), Performance 
Improvement (projects undertaken to date and those upcoming), and VA 
Strategic Partnerships. An ethics briefing for the Committee will also 
be provided.
    On April 15, the Committee will discuss its charge, a 
prioritization of Committee activities and discuss the need for 
convening subcommittees. No time will be allocated at this meeting for 
receiving oral presentations from the public. However, the public may 
submit written statements for the Committee's review to Sharon Gilles, 
Designated Federal Officer, MyVA Program Management Office, Department 
of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Room 430, Washington, DC 
20420, or email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3a69525b485554147d5356565f497a6c7b145d554c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e0b38881928f8ecea7898c8c8593a0b6a1ce878f96">[email protected]</span></a>. Because the meeting will be 
held in a Government building, anyone attending must be prepared to 
show a valid photo ID. Please allow 15 minutes before the meeting 
begins for this process. Any member of the public wishing to attend the 
meeting or seeking additional information should contact Ms. Gilles.

    Dated: March 12, 2015.
Jelessa Burney,
Federal Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-06040 Filed 3-16-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-16-00480-CV

Phyllis BOWSER,

Appellant

v.

Ronald WREN,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CV02075

Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 16, 2016

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

In this appeal, Appellant’s brief was due on September 14, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P.

38.6(a). Two days before the brief was due, pro se appellant Phyllis Bowser filed a motion for 

extension of time to file the brief until October 14, 2016, and this court granted Appellant’s motion. 

On October 14, 2016, Appellant filed a pro se motion asking for the case to be transferred to a 

lower county court or for this court to dismiss her appeal—whichever is the appropriate action. 

She also stated she has been unable to retain an attorney for her appeal, but she “needs to be able 

to represent herself Pro Se.” 
04-16-00480-CV

- 2 -

We construed Appellant’s filing as a motion to dismiss this appeal. See id. R. 42.1(a)(1). 

On October 18, 2016, we advised Appellant she could represent herself in this appeal, but if she 

wished to do so, we ordered her to advise this court in writing by October 28, 2016, and file a 

motion for extension of time to file her brief. We warned Appellant that unless she affirmatively 

responded in writing as ordered, we would dismiss her appeal without further notice. See id.; id.

R. 42.3(b), (c); In re J.R., No. 04-08-00494-CV, 2009 WL 97632, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 

Jan. 14, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.) (per curiam). 

On October 31, 2016, after the deadline to respond had passed, Appellant filed a “Motion 

for Continuance and Mediation.” Appellant’s response, contrary to the express requirement in our 

October 18, 2016 order, is not her brief or a motion for extension of time to file her brief. Instead, 

Appellant requests that we refer this case to mediation.

Appellant’s motion to refer this case to mediation is denied. As we warned Appellant we 

would do if she did not timely respond by filing her brief or a motion for extension of time to file 

her brief, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See id. R. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-2571

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

James Delvico Borden, also known as James Delvoico Borden, also known as Earl

Johnson

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City

____________

 Submitted: May 4, 2017

Filed: May 25, 2017

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
James Delvico Borden directly appeals the sentence the district court

1

imposed

after he pleaded guilty to drug charges. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw,

and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging a

sentencing enhancement, suggesting that the district court miscalculated the

Guidelines imprisonment range, and arguing that Borden’s sentence is substantively

unreasonable. Borden has filed a pro se brief making essentially the same arguments.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not plainly err in

applying the challenged sentencing enhancement. See United States v. Lovelace, 565

F.3d 1080, 1087 (8th Cir. 2009) (failure to object at sentencing results in review for

plain error that affects substantial rights); United States v. Menteer, 408 F.3d 445,

446 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (unobjected-to facts in presentence report are

deemed admitted). We further conclude that the district court did not plainly err in

calculating the Guidelines imprisonment range, or impose a substantively

unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.

2009)(en banc) (describing appellate review ofsentencing decisions); Lovelace, 565

F.3d at 1087; see also United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014)

(on appeal, within-Guidelines-range sentence may be presumed reasonable).

Finally, we have independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v.

Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw, and we affirm the

judgment.

______________________________

1The Honorable Brian C. Wimes, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

-2-
REF ID:A39705 

•naua 1t ., 1J11um 

918 eo..t...s.owi ot Pate••· ~-. 0.-S...SeMl'I 

lt b ~ ttaat '1MI pata.t applleatloa 

ot ftU.S. J. ~ M4 hank J. lewlatt, ltotll ..,io,... et -. 

11'811U. 

U,...:& Col»•• 

Snlal ~ 1o. ~. ?0.'12, ftl.el 

ntaU.C 

lfa'01a 

to 21. a 1•. Sllp1n•at 

le eaau..a 

la ~ 

...... .u pftYf.dou el SecUoa .aM, l!wrind. statiata, .... ....., v.m.o •• 

Utle a. ...Uoa 'Ill. ftl8 tltt. t.a an4 to '1le 1--toa ad app1t.-

oa.Uoa tbe'NIR" U. ........ 1 .... to Uul Vdteil state• u ~,,,.. ... ._ 

e4 1IF UMa hol'9'8:17 ot far '7 anS&11mllllt enoute4 1l:r eal4 Mefraa 

&ad. lfowte•t aAer ate et Aptl. a. 1131. l'MOfttK .lpl'f.1 1•. iw. 

u.s. 140-141. 

1\ 1'u llea ttetda!Mcl th&' the l1Wfldloa 

la laponaat to o. .....- aa4 aat .... of the hlW stawa. aa4 

lt l• ~N Malftt tJaat -. app:Ueattoa k 0011t1.- _... 

S.U. 4814, Bft1M4 Stat.u.. u ••.W. to llftf.l lba War ~18' d a ,...._ pe1'lo4 ~ '1lne ,.n la *1D to MD ,...,._ to Iha· Paten' cm. M pl"OYIW ...,. Ga ..S.4 Stant.. 

ll:aMnl.7 fOUftt 

HARRY H. WOODRIN '.: 

~ottar 

lA\pproved for Release by NSA on 09-27-2013 pursuant to E. 0. 1352§ ·
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY
2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48105-2498

OFFICE OF
AIR AND RADIATION

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: October 13, 2009 Teleconference with Delphi

FROM: Brian Nelson

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0472

DATE: March 15, 2010



### ______________________________________________________________________________

On October 13, 2009, from 4-to-5 p.m., we had a te leconference meeting with Delphi to discuss air conditioning-related topics in the September 28, 2009 Proposed Rulemaking To Establish Light-Duty Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards a nd Corporate Average Fuel Economy. Topics included a general discussion of cr edits for reducing refrigerant l eakage, credits for improving air conditioning system efficienc y, and the A/C CO2 Idle Test.

Attendees from Delphi were: Timothy Craig

Prasad Kadle Mingyu Wang

Mark Zima

Attendees from EPA were:

Ed Nam

Brian Nelson
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


The Board of Directors
Green Tree Financial Corporation:


We consent to incorporation by reference of our report dated January 24, 1997,
except as to Notes B, G, H, I,K and O, which are as of January 27, 1998,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Green Tree Financial Corporation
and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and 1995 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1996, which report appears in
the December 31, 1996 Form 10-K/A of Green Tree Financial Corporation, in the
following Registration Statements of Green Tree Financial Corporation; No.
2-88293 on Form S-8, No. 33-26498 on Form S-8/S-3, No. 33-60541 on Form S-8/S-3,
No. 33-51804 on Form S-3, No. 33-64185 on Form S-3, No. 33-64183 on Form S-3,
No. 333-18343 on Form S-3, No. 333-20335 on Form S-3, No. 333-15437 on Form S-3
and No. 333-21191 on Form S-8/S-3.

/s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP


Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 18, 1998
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2270 

To prohibit Federal funding to entities that do not certify the entities will 

not perform, or provide any funding to any other entity that performs, 

an abortion. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 24, 2021 

Mrs. BLACKBURN (for herself, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. BRAUN, Mr. DAINES, Mr. 

WICKER, Mr. TILLIS, Ms. ERNST, Mr. ROUNDS, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. 

TUBERVILLE, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina, and Mr. 

SCOTT of Florida) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To prohibit Federal funding to entities that do not certify 

the entities will not perform, or provide any funding 

to any other entity that performs, an abortion. 

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 Life and 

5 Taxpayers Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ABORTION. 

7 (a) PROHIBITION.—No Federal funds may be pro8 vided (directly or indirectly, including through contract or 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2270 IS

1 subcontract) to an entity unless the entity certifies that, 

2 during the period for which such funds are provided, the 

3 entity will not perform, and will not provide any funds 

4 to any other entity that performs, an abortion. 

5 (b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) does not apply with 

6 respect to an abortion where— 

7 (1) the pregnancy is the result of rape or in8 cest; or 

9 (2) a physician certifies that the woman suffers 

10 from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical 

11 illness that would place the woman in danger of 

12 death unless an abortion is performed, including a 

13 life-threatening physical condition caused by, or aris14 ing from, the pregnancy itself. 

15 (c) HOSPITALS.—Subsection (a) does not apply with 

16 respect to a hospital, so long as such hospital does not, 

17 during the period for which funds described in subsection 

18 (a) are provided to such hospital, provide funds to any 

19 non-hospital entity that performs an abortion (other than 

20 an abortion described in subsection (b)). 

21 (d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

22 (1) The term ‘‘entity’’ means the entire legal 

23 entity, including any entity that controls, is con24 trolled by, or is under common control with, such 

25 entity. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2270 IS

1 (2) The term ‘‘hospital’’ has the meaning given 

2 such term in section 1861(e) of the Social Security 

3 Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(e)). 

Æ 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
REF ID:A55766&:Je,.,,; r~~ ... ~:..,g_ ,....'" 

Tafel N. 

..., .. · 

Fig. HI. 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 05-28-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Sakhorn Khamsiry , Appellant

No. 06

- 23

- 00216

- CR v.

The State of Texas , Appellee Appeal from the 451st Judicial District Court of Kendall County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 9133 ). Panel c onsists of Chief Justice Stevens and Justices van Cleef and Rambin. Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice Rambin

.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court below. We affirm the judgment of the tri al court. We note that the appellant, Sakhorn Khamsiry , has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED MAY 20 , 2024 BY ORDER OF THE COURT SCOTT E. STEVENS CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autr ey , Clerk
REF ID:A40358 

.. 

---------------------------------- ~-

- - -- -------1--,-------------------------- --------------

-------'---f-·------ _...J,...____. ___ -- :;:;_ #> 

... ~ 

__ _.__~--~--1-------.-------'-------- --·---~--~------------

I 

I 

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

I I 

' -----~-.:I.---- -

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 09-26-2013 pursuantto E .0. 1352a
February 11, 2013

To : Lauralyn J. Remo
From : Daniel F. Goodness, Hatchery Manager Prince of Wales Hatchery Association
Re : Island Air Express, Mail Delivery to Klawock, AK Good morning, Lauralyn, I am the Hatchery Manager for POWHA. This company produces chinook and coho salmon for the common property fisheries of Southeast Alaska. We provide many visitors to this area with sportfishing opportunities, and do our part to help drive the local economy. I am extremely grateful for the presence of Island Air Express, located at the Klawock airport. I am very much in favor of Island Air Express having equal opportunity to carry mail to this island from Ketchikan. My understanding is that Isl and Air Express has airplanes that can safely travel in conditions of no visibility. I know that many times the weather has prevented scheduled flights on the floatplanes that currently travel between here and Ketchikan. There is no logical reason to exc lude Island Air Express from sharing in the business of carry mail, or freight, or supplies, or passengers, to and from this Island. Please consider this letter of support as you make decisions regarding the future of mail delivery to this remote site.
Thank you, Dan Daniel F. Goodness, Manager Prince of Wales Hatchery Association PO Box 554 Craig, Alaska 99921 Phone: (907) 755

- 2231 Fax: (907) 755

- 2440
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

I, David W. Froesel, Jr.,
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Omnicare, Inc. (the
Company), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the
 Company for the period ended March 31, 2009 (the Periodic Report) fully
 complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
 Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
| | 2. The information contained in the Periodic
 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
 results of operations of the Company.                                                                                     

|                       |                           
|---------------------- | --------------------------
|Date:
  April 30, 2009 |                           
|                       |                           
|                       | /s/ David W.
 Froesel, Jr.
|                       |                           
|                       | David W.
 Froesel, Jr.    
|                       | Senior Vice
 President and
|                       | Chief
 Financial Officer  

---
99-1357.

#### State ex rel. Dillon v. Mahoning Cty. Court of Appeals Judges.

In Mandamus. On motion to dismiss of Mahoning County. Court of Appeals Judges; Motion to dismiss *1460sustained. Cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
DMVIT • II/L2 (Luftfahrtsbulehungan) 

Poslanschrifl: Postfach201. 1000 Wien riTiirklTO r I ^ ^ i^i -

Buroanschrift; RadeUkystraBe 2,1030 Wien 1 "'''AnTMi Nl Ur hmKrifi s 

E-Mal, ,2@.TM,..9v.a. ^ANSPORWIO N ^ " « ^ ' * 

. M',ETOPER^!ONS^'^"rr;;: 

GZ, BMVIT-40.005/0005-II/L2/2010 DVR:0000175 

m ^CT ? 5 P I- 2 1 

Paul Gretch 

Director, Office of International Aviation 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Aviation and International Affairs 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New/ Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Paul.GretchO.dot.gov 

CC: apoell@jetalliance.at 

Vienna, 23 June 2010 

Dear Mr. Gretch, 

With reference to the intentions of the Austrian designated carrier 

JETALLIANCE Flugbetriebs AG 

to conduct non-scheduled air services to/from the United States based on fifth, sixth or seventh 

freedom traffic rights, according to the provisions of the bilateral air services agreement (Air 

Services Agreement between the Austrian Federal Government and the Government of the United 

States of America, done at Vienna on 16" of March 1989. as amended) Austrian Civil Aviation 

Authority hereby confirms that similar requests submitted by U.S. carriers will be treated on the 

basis of reciprocity. 

Sincerely/Vours, 

Q 

Silvia Gehrer 

Director, Air Transport Affairs 

Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology 

Civil Aviation Authority Austria
<PAGE>

                                  [EXHIBIT 11]

                         NORTH FORK BANCORPORATION, INC.

              COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARE
                               SEPTEMBER 30, 2002
                                   (UNAUDITED)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                        THREE MONTHS ENDED                NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    SEPTEMBER 30,     SEPTEMBER 30,   SEPTEMBER 30,    SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                                        2002              2001            2002             2001
                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                                <C>               <C>             <C>               <C>
Net Income                                                          $106,847,133      $84,853,733    $309,598,074      $241,499,936

Common Equivalent Shares:

Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding                           160,306,872      159,682,475     160,398,369       159,429,006
Weighted Average Common Equivalent Shares                              1,940,784        1,919,539       1,906,661         1,835,219
                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted Average Common and Common Equivalent Shares                 162,247,656      161,602,014     162,305,030       161,264,225
                                                                 ===================================================================

Net Income per Common Equivalent Share - Basic                      $  0.67           $  0.53         $  1.93           $  1.51
Net Income per Common Equivalent Share - Diluted                    $  0.66           $  0.53         $  1.91           $  1.50
</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7420

JIMMIE NELSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

W. L. EAGLETON, Associate Warden, in his

personal and official capacity,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(CA-95-2073-2-18AJ)

Submitted: January 9, 1997 Decided: January 24, 1997

Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jimmie Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra J. Senn, STUCKEY & SENN,

Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record

and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.

Nelson v. Eagleton, No. CA-95-2073-2-18AJ (D.S.C. Aug. 2, 1996). 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