alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 64 (Friday, April 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18224-18225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07689]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric 
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1065-000.
    Applicants: Balko Wind, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to February 18, 2015 Balko Wind, LLC tariff 
filing.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5238.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/10/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1394-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
03-27_Add ALP Utilities to Sch 7,8,9 to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5250.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1395-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
03-27_SA 6509 White Pine 2 SSR Termination to be effective 4/15/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5291.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1396-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
03-27_Cancel Schedule 43I White Pine 2 SSR to be effective 4/15/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5293.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1397-000.

[[Page 18225]]

    Applicants: Aspen Merchant Energy, LP.
    Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 35.15: Aspen Merchant Energy, LP 
Notification of Cancellation to be effective 3/27/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5298.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by 
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above 
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be 
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the 
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing 
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying 
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: March 27, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-07689 Filed 4-2-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
# Missouri Court of Appeals

Southern District

JANUARY 7, 2014

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

1. Case No. SD32650

Re: RICHARD GEORGE ANDERSON,

Movant-Appellant,

vs. STATE OF MISSOURI,

Respondent-Respondent.
Stratification of South Dakota

2014

Prepared by Geospatial Science and Survey Section, 2014

Land Use Strata

>75% Cultivated

51-75% Culitvated

15-50% Cultivated

Agri-Urban: >100 homes/sq. mi.

Commercial: >100 homes/sq. mi.

<15% Cultivated

Non-Agricultural

Water

Unprojected, Geographic Coordinates
. . 

Record of Discussion 

Docket No. FAA- t ot c..f- N""'--2c:::>s--~ Directorate Identifier: -AD 

With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, 

manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)? 

ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE TOPICS DISCUSSED 

Boeing Seth Bird 2013-2014 Other. List below. 

' 

Other/ Additional Information: I have discussed the matter with safety focal (Seth Bird). The 

discussion centers on the nature/extent of the problem and its correction actions . 

• f 

9
Louisiana National Guard Conducts Premobilization Training
 
  By Sgt. 1st Class Scott D. Longstreet,
  PINEVILLE, La. – Approximately 85 Soldiers from the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 139th Regional Support Group, conducted annual premobilization training March 2-16. The two-week training at the Louisiana National Guard Training Center increased the Soldiers’ skills and readiness while identifying gaps or deficiencies. “The preparation period is crucial for building camaraderie among the Soldiers and ensuring that everyone is on the same page before heading into a stressed deployment environment,” said Command Sgt. Maj. Donald G. Lavalais, 139th RSG senior enlisted leader. “It allows us to make necessary adjustments in our tactics and procedures before being deployed. By training collectively and bringing our skills together, we are better prepared to face challenges that lie ahead during our mission.” The LANG conducts pre-mob ATs for units to address and resolve issues before moving to their mobilization site or forward deployment location. “Familiarity with their surroundings can make a significant difference in training,” Lavalais said. “I mean, who does not like playing in their own backyard? Knowing the terrain and weather patterns gives our operations cell a competitive edge to plan training tasks and boost Soldiers’ confidence. Plus, being close to home means less time spent traveling and more time focused on honing skills and improving performance. It’s a win-win for everyone involved.” This year’s requirements included the Army Combat Fitness Test, individual weapons qualification and familiarization, and battle drills and warrior tasks. Mobilizing units must also conduct a Soldier readiness processing event, allowing the state to validate Soldiers through medical and administrative evaluations and verify the deployment status of each unit member. The training culminated with a three-day staff exercise that simulated scenarios the Soldiers might encounter while deployed. “Annual training is the building block to learning not only the people and their personalities but also the work ethic and cohesion of the teams,” said Spc. Kylie E. Leday. “Being able to contact our counterparts down range has really allowed me to see the bigger picture of the overall mission. Getting hands-on training on the front end allowed many of us to gain more clarity on what a workday will look like on this mobilization.” Leday, deploying for the first time, will be the acting religious affairs specialist for 139th and will serve on the Unit Ministry Team with the chaplain. This spring, the 139th RSG will mobilize to Europe to support the European Assure, Deter and Reinforce mission.
_______________________________________ __ 

### Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



## December 18, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice



## 136328 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n 

## PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, J ustices



## v SC: 136328 COA: 283342 Kalamazoo CC: 07-001233-FC EVERETT DUANE KINGSBURY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 5, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

1211 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 18, 2008

Clerk
2014 RIN supply (million RINs)

RINs Volume

Generated Generated Generated

D code Fuel type Domestic Imported Domestic + imports Corrections Exported Total Domestic Imported Domestic + imports Corrections Exported Total

3 & 7 Biogas 33 0 33 33 33 0 33 33

3 & 7 Ethanol 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1

3 & 7 Heating oil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3 & 7 Renewable diesel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3 & 7 Renewable gasoline 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 Biodiesel 1,959 194 2,153 124 2,029 1,306 130 1,435 83 1,352

4 Renewable diesel 254 302 556 82 473 150 177 327 48 279

5 Biogas 20 0 20 20 20 0 20 20

5 Ethanol 26 64 90 90 26 64 90 90

5 Heating oil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5 Naphtha 18 0 18 18 12 0 12 12

5 Renewable diesel 15 0 15 15 9 0 9 9

6 Biodiesel 2 78 80 80 1 52 53 53

6 Ethanol 14,006 1 14,007 846 13,162 14,006 1 14,007 846 13,162

6 Renewable diesel 0 257 257 249 9 0 151 151 146 5

3 & 7 33 0 33 0 0 33 33 0 33 0 0 33

4 2,213 496 2,709 82 124 2,502 1,456 307 1,763 48 83 1,631

5 79 64 143 0 0 143 67 64 131 0 0 131

6 14,008 336 14,345 249 846 13,250 14,008 204 14,212 146 846 13,220

All advanced 2,325 560 2,885 82 124 2,679 1,556 371 1,927 48 83 1,796

Total 16,333 897 17,230 331 970 15,929 15,563 576 16,139 195 929 15,016

Total ethanol 14,033 66 14,098 0 846 13,253 14,033 66 14,098 0 846 13,253

Total biodiesel 1,961 272 2,233 0 124 2,108 1,307 181 1,489 0 83 1,406

Total renewable diesel 269 559 828 331 0 497 158 329 487 195 0 293
Petition for Exemption or Rulemaking 14 CFR § 11.81 “section 333.”

To whom it may concern, My name is Jean
- Mario Moril. I am a co

- owner of eaglelens photography based out of San Diego, CA. My partner (Wassef Karmal ) and I would like to apply for the stated exemption in order to be fully in compliance with the FAA rules and regulations. Our business model is to provide aerial imaging that will allow businesses to better promote their brand. We use some of the latest technological advanced drones to ensure safety to both persons and property. Our standard operating procedure includes a three man team. One that flies the drone, one that operates the camera/video, and one that serves as an observer to ensure safety from start to finish. Operating equipment includes; Dji Inspire 1 with dual remote function Tornado H920 Typhoon Q500+ Website: http://www.eaglelensphotography.com/
Peanuts 2022

Planted Acres by County

for Selected States

U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service

Acres

Not Estimated

< 3,000

3,000 - 9,999

10,000 - 14,999

15,000 - 19,999

20,000 - 29,999

30,000 +
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 November 30, 2016

a1121

Order 

Clerk

November 30, 2016

152837 & (19)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 152837

COA: 328993

Wayne CC: 94-008988-FC

JERMAINE DUWAN HUNTER,

Defendant-Appellant. 

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 2, 2015 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s 

motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G). The motion to remand 

is DENIED.
Exhibit 32

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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Green Oaks Concepts,  Ltd..,
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the  undersigned,
Daniel L. Hodges,  Chief Executive Officer and Principal  Accounting  Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and
belief:

         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 result of  operations of the
Company.


Date: September 4, 2004

/s/ Daniel L. Hodges
Daniel L. Hodges
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has 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.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-3459

___________

Gary A. Ebeck, *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Western

v. * District of Missouri.

*

United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: November 16, 1999

Filed: November 23, 1999

___________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Gary A. Ebeck received a 240-month sentence after pleading guilty to

kidnapping and firearm charges. In June 1996, Ebeck filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion

to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence, which the district court denied on the

merits. This court denied Ebeck's request for a certificate of appealability. In April

1997, Ebeck filed a second § 2255 motion, raising the same claims presented in his first

motion and adding two new claims. The district court denied Ebeck's second motion

because Ebeck failed to obtain the certification from this court required before filing

a second § 2255 motion. This court again denied Ebeck's request for a certificate of
-2-

appealability. In May 1998, Ebeck filed a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)

motion, raising "claims previously stated in a § 2255 motion." (Ebeck's Reply Br. at

1). The district court construed the Rule 60(b) motion as a successive § 2255 motion

and denied the motion, stating Ebeck did not receive the required certification from this

court before filing his successive motion. 

Ebeck appeals, contending the district court should not have treated his Rule

60(b) motion as a successive § 2255 motion. We disagree. A Rule 60(b) motion

seeking relief from the denial of a § 2255 motion and raising claims of a postconviction

relief nature, as Ebeck's does, should be construed as a successive § 2255 motion. See

Guinan v. Delo, 5 F.3d 313, 316-17 (8th Cir. 1993); Blair v. Armontrout, 976 F.2d

1130, 1134 (8th Cir. 1992). A successive § 2255 motion requires certification by this

court before filing, see 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(3)(A), 2255 (Supp. II 1996), and the

district court properly denied Ebeck's motion because Ebeck did not comply with this

requirement,see United States v. Rich, 141 F.3d 550, 553 (5th Cir. 1998), cert. denied,

119 S. Ct. 1156 (1999); Felker v. Turpin, 101 F.3d 657, 660-61 (11th Cir. 1996) (per

curiam). 

We thus affirm the district court's denial of Ebeck's Rule 60(b) motion. See 8th

Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

\1:11' Protect Hoosiers tmel Our Environment.

Mi/(/;dl E. Da"ieL,·,.fr. 100 North Senate Avenue

Governor Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

(317) 232-8603

]Z,olllm IV /:;'mtcrly Toll Free (800) 451,6027

Commissioner www.idem.IN.goY

June 28,2009

Bharat Mathur

Acting Regional Administrator

U.S. EPA, Region V

77 West Jackson Boulevard

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Re: State Implementation Plan Submittal for Indiana

regarding 326 lAC 24 - CAIR Amendments (LSA #08-5)

Dear Mr. Mathur:

Pursuant to Section 110 ofthe 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and Title 13 ofthe Indiana

Code, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) herewith submits an amendment

to the Indiana state implementation plan (SIP). This SIP amendment consists of amendments to 326

lAC 24-1, 326 lAC 24-2, and 326 lAC 24-3 (Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)).

On October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59480), U.S. EPA gave limited approval ofIndiana's CAIR rules.

These amendments to the CAIR rules address issues identified by U.S. EPA to secure full approval and

revisions to the definition of cogeneration unit published on October 19, 2007 (72 FR 59190).

In order to assist with your review ofthis state implementation plan submission, a list of

supporting documents is attached.

Throughout the development ofthis rule, staff ofthe Office of Legal Counsel worked closely

with your staff to ensure that any potential problems that might exist with this requested SIP revision

would be resolved. I request that U.S. EPA approve this amendment to Indiana's SIP. If you have any

questions regarding this submittal, please contact Pat Troth, Rules Development Branch, Office of

Legal Counsel at 317-233-5681.

DM/sb

Attachments: Supporting Documents

cc: John Mooney, U.S. EPA

Steve Rosenthal, U.S. EPA

Susan Bem, IDEM

SIP file

An Equal Opportunity Employer

ner, Office ofAir Quality

Pll'rISt' Retyde 0
Mr. Bharat Mathur

Page 201'2

Supporting Documents

Attachment A: Final rule. LSA Document # 08-5(F) as published in the Indiana Register on

June 10,2009 (DIN: 200906IO-IR-326080005FRA)

Attachment B: Signature page

Attachment C: Section 7 Notice as published in the Indiana Register on January 23, 2008 (DIN:

20080123-IR-326080005FDA)

Attachment D: Publishers Affidavits

Attachment E: Transcript of First Public Hearing held on May 7, 2008

Attachment F: Transcript of Second Public Hearing held on March 4, 2009

Attachment G: Proposed rule as published in the Indiana Register on May 28, 2008 (DIN:

20080528-IR-326080005PRA)

Attachment H: Rulemaking fact sheet

Attachment I: Administrative Checklist (40 CFR 5 I, Appendix V)

Recycled Paper @ An E<lual Opportunity Employer Please Rayele 0
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 20, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 69642]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27818]

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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Tennessee Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Tennessee 
Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held on 
December 11, 2013, at the Nashville Public Library, 615 Church Street, 
Nashville, TN 37219. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 2:00 p.m. EST 
and adjourn at approximately 3:30 p.m. EST. The purpose of the meeting 
is to discuss the Committee's report on ex-felon voting rights and plan 
other Committee projects.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the Southern Regional Office of the 
Commission by January 11, 2014. The address is Southern Regional 
Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Suite 
16T126, Atlanta, GA 30303. Persons wishing to email their comments or 
who desire additional information should contact Peter Minarik, 
Regional Director of the Southern Regional Office, at (404) 562-7000 
(or for hearing impaired TDD 913-551-1414), or by email to 
pminarik@usccr.gov. Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the 
meeting and require the services of a sign language interpreter should 
contact the Regional Office at least ten (10) working days before the 
scheduled date of the meeting.
    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced 
at the Southern Regional Office, as they become available, both before 
and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory 
committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, 
www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Southern Regional Office at the above 
email or street address. The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the 
provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated: November 15, 2013.
David Mussatt,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2013-27818 Filed 11-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 1, 2021

b0524 

# Order

Clerk June 1, 2021

161888

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 161888

COA: 353352

St Joseph CC: 12

- 018185

- FH

PATRICK EUGENE SCARBERRY,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 29, 2020 order of

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the d efendant has failed to

meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                       4,968,294
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  944,975
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (324,366)
<INVENTORY>                                    256,235
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,849,742
<PP&E>                                         756,095
<DEPRECIATION>                                (272,828)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,372,157
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          563,650
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,878
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,802,629
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,808,507
<SALES>                                      2,453,285
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,453,285
<CGS>                                        1,523,108
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,523,108
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,453,425
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               342,366
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (364,019)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (4,501,595)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (4,501,495)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (.77)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.77)


</TABLE>