alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 13757]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05105]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Advanced Fluids for Electrified Vehicles

    Notice is hereby given that, on January 17, 2022, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Advanced Fluids for 
Electrified Vehicles (``AFEV'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were 
filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the 
recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Specifically, American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc., 
Detroit, MI; The Shephard Chemical Co., Norwood, OH; and Tianjin SwARC 
Automotive Research Laboratory Co., Ltd., Tianjin, CHINA, have been 
added as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and AFEV intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On June 16, 2021, AFEV filed its original notification pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice 
in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on August 
16, 2021 (86 FR 45751).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on December 02, 
2021. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on January 13, 2022 (87 FR 2183).

Suzanne Morris,
Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-05105 Filed 3-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ricky Timothy WYATT, Jr., a/k/a Knuckles, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7184

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 21, 2017

Decided: December 28, 2017

Ricky Timothy Wyatt, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Angela Mastandrea-Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ricky Timothy Wyatt, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability -will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v.*McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wyatt has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
# EUR-Lex - 32002D0221 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32002D0221

**2002/221/EC: Commission Decision of 14 March 2002 amending Decision 96/587/EC on the publication of the list of recognised organisations which have been notified by Member States in accordance with Council Directive 94/57/EC (Text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C(2002) 995) **

*
Official Journal L 073 , 15/03/2002 P. 0030 - 0031 *

Commission Decision

of 14 March 2002

amending Decision 96/587/EC on the publication of the list of recognised organisations which have been notified by Member States in accordance with Council Directive 94/57/EC

(notified under document number C(2002) 995)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2002/221/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations(1), as amended by Commission Directive 97/58/EC(2), and in particular Article 4(5) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) A list of recognised organisations was published by Commission Decision 96/587/EC of 30 September 1996(3), as amended by Decision 98/403/EC(4).

(2) In the light of Commission Decision 2000/481/EC of 14 July 2000 on the recognition of the "Rinave - Registro Internacional Naval, SA" in accordance with Council Directive 94/57/EC(5) and Commission Decision 2001/890/EC of 13 December 2001 on the recognition of the "Hellenic Register of Shipping" in accordance with Council Directive 94/57/EC(6) the Commission should update that list.

(3) Decision 96/587/EC should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex to Decision 96/587/EC is replaced by the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 14 March 2002.

For the Commission

Loyola de Palacio

Vice-President

(1) OJ L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 20.

(2) OJ L 274, 7.10.1997, p. 8.

(3) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 43.

(4) OJ L 178, 23.6.1998, p. 39.

(5) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 91.

(6) OJ L 329, 14.12.2001, p. 72.

ANNEX

The Annex is replaced by the following: "1. Organisations recognised on the basis of Article 4(1) of Directive 94/57/EC:

American Bureau of Shipping (ABS)

Bureau Veritas (BV)

China Classification Society (CCS)

Det Norske Veritas (DNV)

Germanischer Lloyd (GL)

Korean Register of Shipping (KR)

Lloyd's Register of Shipping (LR)

Nippon Kaiji Kyokai (NK)

Registro Italiano Navale (RINA)

Russian Maritime Register of Shipping (RS)

2. Organisations recognised on the basis of Article 4(3) of Directive 94/57/EC:

Hellenic Register of Shipping (HR)

(The effects of this recognition are limited to Greece)

Registro Internacional Naval, SA (RINAVE)

(The effects of this recognition are limited to Portugal)".
<Page>




                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated February 8,
2001 (relating to the consolidated financial statements of DaimlerChrysler
Corporation not presented separately herein), included as Exhibit 10.3 of
this Amended Annual Report on Form 20-F of DaimlerChrysler AG for the year
ended December 31, 2001, in the following Registration Statements:

                  REGISTRATION
FORM              STATEMENT NO.             ISSUER

F-3               333-13160                 DaimlerChrysler North America
                                            Holding Corporation

S-8               333-5074                  DaimlerChrysler AG

S-8               333-7082                  DaimlerChrysler AG

S-8               333-8998                  DaimlerChrysler AG

S-8               333-86934                 DaimlerChrysler AG

S-8               333-86936                 DaimlerChrysler AG



Deloitte & Touche LLP

Detroit, Michigan
June 27, 2002
#### Ricky Ronnell EWING, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Mikel PEABODY, Corrections Officer at SMCI; Zenia Holicomb, Lieutenant at SMCI; Shetica Lockhart, Lieutenant at SMCI, Defendants-Appellees

No. 17-60412

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 7, 2017

Ricky Ronnell Ewing, Pro Se

Tommy Darrell Goodwin, Esq., Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Mississippi, Jackson, MS, for Defendants-Appellees

Before DENNIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. ;

PER CURIAM: *

Ricky Ronnell Ewing, Mississippi prisoner # 34353, moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeai from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. §' 1983 complaint. The district court denied Ewing leave to proceed IFP on appeal, certifying that the appeal was not taken in good faith because Ewing had not sought review of any issue that was arguable on its merits.

Ewing pleads his indigency and complains of prison officials’ mistreatment of him, but he does not address the legal basis for the district court’s dismissal of his complaint, namely, his failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Because Ewing has failed to challenge the legal basis for the district court’s dismissal of his .§ 1983 complaint and the certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith, he has abandoned the critical issues of his appeal. *See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner,*813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Thus, the appeal lacks arguable merit and is therefore frivolous. *See Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Ewing’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. *See Baugh v. Taylor,*117 F.3d 197, 202 n.24 (5th Cir. 1997); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). *See*§ 1915(g); *Coleman v. Tollefson, -*U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1759, 1763-64, 191 L.Ed.2d 803 (2015). Ewing has at least two other strikes. *Ewing v. Richie, et al.,*701 Fed.Appx. 397 (5th Cir. 2017); *Ewing v. Jone, et al.,*No. 1:15-CV-254 (S.D. Miss. Feb. 1, 2016). As Ewing has accumulated at least three strikes under § 1915(g), he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed in a court of the United States while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. *See*§ 1915(g). Ewing is further warned that any future frivolous or repetitive filings in this court or any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction will subject him to additional sanctions.

MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; § 1915(g) BAR IMPOSED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Williams, Renee (OST) "POT^ 06T-/117- ^ i[V^Z>-

From: John Stevens [stevens.john709@gnnail.conn] 

Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:35 PM 

To: EAS (OST) 

Subject: Massena, NY Essential Air Service ;i3 

0 " i 

'X3 -iC/j - Mr. Devany, cvj c-^333 

I would like to show my support of Cape air for the following reasons. "0 >*^ ^ 

1. Cape Air is offering more frequent service, 21 per week versus 12 per (_o $5 

week for Gulfstream. '^'^ 

2. Gulfstream is asking for an annual subsidy nearly one million dollars 

more than Cape Air (Gulfstream-$2,518,485 vs. Cape Air $1,519,732.) That 

is one million dollars that we as taxpayers cant afford to spend. 

3. Cape Air will fly to Albany, and is also offering Boston. I agree 

Boston has more connections, and travelers will be able to continue onto 

Boston on Cape Air. 

4. Noted in the Massena paper, of the 60 responses to the Business 

Development Corporation's survey, the majority chose Albany as their 

preferred destination. 

5. Cape Air has provided reliable and courteous service to it's passengers 

over the last two years. 

6. Gulfstream only proposes a single flight on the weekends. This will make it 

difficult if not impossible to make connecting flights. 

7.According to Gulfstream's public financial reports, they are on the verge of 

bankruptcy. 

Thank You, 

John Stevens 

Madrid, NY
**Exhibit 15.1**
July 7, 2004
Board of Directors and StockholdersParty City CorporationRockaway, New Jersey
We have made a review, in accordance withstandards established by the Public Company Accounting OversightBoard (United States), of the unaudited interim financialinformation of Party City Corporation and Subsidiary for thequarter and six months ended December 27, 2003 andDecember 28, 2002, as indicated in our report datedFebruary 9, 2004 (June 30, 2004 as to the effects ofthe restatement discussed in Note 11) (which reportincludes an explanatory paragraph relating to the restatement ofthe condensed consolidated financial statements); because we didnot perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on thatinformation.
We are aware that our report referred to above,which is included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/Afor the quarter and six months ended December 27, 2003, isincorporated by reference in Registration StatementNos. 333-75078, 333-65632 and 333-19473 on Form S-8 ofParty City Corporation.
We also are aware that the aforementioned report,pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933,is not considered a part of the Registration Statement preparedor certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certifiedby an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7and 11 of that Act.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
New York, New York
#### Michael McQuigan, Resp’t, v. The Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co., App’lt.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the amended Annual Report of Aquamer Medical Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K/A for the year ending December 31, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "
Report"), I, Edwin A. Reilly,
President, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:




(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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




Date:
December 3, 2010




/s/ Edwin
      A. ReillyEdwin
      A. Reilly,
                  Chief
      Executive Officer
                  (Principal Executive
Officer)
**JK** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 18 - 0 218 STATE OF MONTANA ,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. RANDY LEE TYER ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**GRANT OF EXTENSION** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a n extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is gran ted an extension of time to and including April 6 , 2020 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court March 6 2020

03/06/2020
Case Number: DA 18-0218
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2004176EN.01000801.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 11.5.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 176/8 |

---

Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2004/363/EC of 6 April 2004 concerning protection measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza in the United States of America

(
[Official Journal of the European Union L 114 of 21 April 2004](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_114_R_TOC)
)

On page 21, in Article 3, paragraph 1, the following words shall be deleted:

‘... of the products mentioned in Article 2 ...’.

---
III

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 61

Commending the Americans who served the United States during the period

known as the Cold War.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 23, 1996

Mr. DOLE submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on Armed Services

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Commending the Americans who served the United States

during the period known as the Cold War.

Whereas the most dangerous military competition in the history of mankind has come to a close without a nuclear

holocaust;

Whereas men and women in the armed forces, intelligence

community, and foreign service community of the United

States faithfully performed their duties during the period

known as the Cold War;

Whereas many of these persons were isolated from family and

friends and served under arduous conditions in far away

lands in order to preserve peace and harmony throughout

the world;
2

•SCON 61 IS

Whereas these persons performed their duty in the most successful, extended, military competition in the history of

mankind and ensured that weapons of mass destruction,

capable of destroying all humanity, were never released;

Whereas the self-discipline and dedication of these persons

were fundamental to the prevention of a Super Power

conflict; and

Whereas the silent determination of these persons brought a

peaceful victory to all the people of the world: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That Congress acknowledges the service and

3 sacrifices of these Americans who contributed to historic

4 victory in the Cold War.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 23 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 23

  Expressing the sense of the Congress in affirmation of the National 
 Voter Registration Act of 1993, commonly known as the Motor Voter Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               August 4 (legislative day, July 10), 1995

  Mr. Simon submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
         referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of the Congress in affirmation of the National 
 Voter Registration Act of 1993, commonly known as the Motor Voter Act.
Whereas section 4 of article I of the Constitution provides that the times, 
        places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives 
        shall be prescribed by State legislatures, subject to laws passed by the 
        Congress;
Whereas the results of a recent study by the Congressional Budget Office 
        indicate that the costs of implementing the National Voter Registration 
        Act of 1993, commonly known as the Motor Voter Act, are far less than 
        costs that would be considered unfunded mandates under the criteria of 
        the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995; and
Whereas States that have complied with the Motor Voter Act have, through such 
        compliance, registered new voters in proportion to the demographics of 
        those States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that--
            (1) the Congress is responsible for the ultimate protection 
        of the voting process, which responsibility is to be exercised 
        by making the voting process available to all persons who are 
        eligible to become voters;
            (2) it is appropriate for the Congress to affirm that the 
        National Voter Registration Act of 1993, commonly known as the 
        Motor Voter Act, is an appropriate measure to ensure the full 
        participation of the American electorate in voting;
            (3) any failure of a State to comply with the Motor Voter 
        Act is illegal;
            (4) not later than November 5, 1995, the Governors of the 
        States should comply with the Motor Voter Act; and
            (5) the actions of the Attorney General in seeking 
        enforcement of the Motor Voter Act have the support of the 
        Congress.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

Certification

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of PowerCerv
Corporation, a Florida corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that the
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30,
2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                         |                                                                                    
|------------------------ | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: November 13, 2003 | /s/ John S. McMullen
Name: John S. McMullen
Title: Chairman of the Board
(chairman)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Erick Soriano DOMINGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-10325 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 20, 2017

James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Erick Soriano Dominguez, Seagoville, TX, Pro Se

Before JONES, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

*253PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Erick Soriano Dominguez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Dominguez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATE 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 Annual Report (the Report) on the Form 10-K/A of Munro Developments Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Andrew Munro, Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Director, 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 and belief:  1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  2. The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.  Date: March 3, 2015  /s/ ANDREW MUNRO Andrew Munro Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, President, Secretary and Director