alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

1650 Arch Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

October 29, 2010

Mr. David K. Paylor, Director

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

P.O. Box 1105

Richmond, Virginia 23218 

Dear Mr. Paylor:

On September 29, 2010, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a 

revision to the Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality which moves Virginia’s regulation for open burning from 9VAC5, 

Chapter 40, Part II, Article 40 (repealed) to 9VAC5, Chapter 130 (added). EPA has determined 

that the submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing it to prepare a 

Direct Final Rulemaking Notice action.

If members of your staff have any questions, they may direct them to Mr. Harold A. 

Frankford at (215) 814-2108. He is the principal contact for this rulemaking. 

Sincerely, 

/s/

 Diana Esher, Director

 Air Protection Division
EXHIBIT 31

Certification of Chief Executive Officer  Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I,
Paul S. Viviano, certify that:

|Dated: November 14, 2003 |  | /s/PAUL S. VIVIANOPaul S. Viviano President and Chief Executive Officer
|------------------------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

Certification of Chief Financial Officer  Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I,
Kenneth S. Ord, certify that:

|Dated: November 14, 2003 |  | /s/KENNETH S. ORDKenneth S. Ord Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|------------------------ |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

Press Release                                                     Source: Dynegy
Dynegy Elects Dan Dienstbier Chairman of the Board

HOUSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 20, 2002--The Board of Directors of Dynegy Inc.
(NYSE:DYN - News) today announced the election of Dan Dienstbier as the
company's chairman of the board. Dienstbier will continue in his present role as
interim chief executive officer until a successor is named.

Commenting on the board's election, J. Otis Winters, lead director and chairman
of the Governance and Nominating Committee, said, "Certainty, consistency and
confidence in company leadership is one of our top priorities, and Dan has
excelled in every aspect of his duties as a member of the board and interim
chief executive officer.

"His commitment to responsibility, performance and accountability made him the
clear choice to serve in these roles. We are confident that Dan can continue to
build on Dynegy's recent achievements and address its priorities, including the
execution of its capital and liquidity plan," he added.

Dynegy also announced that H. John Riley, Jr., chairman, president and chief
executive officer of Cooper Industries, Ltd., a worldwide manufacturer of
electrical products, tools and hardware, has resigned from the board of
directors. Riley, who currently serves as director of The Allstate Corporation,
Baker Hughes Incorporated and Junior Achievement Inc., was elected to Dynegy's
board in May 2001.

"The demands on my time, resulting from my duties at Cooper Industries and my
responsibilities to the various organizations I serve as a director and
volunteer, reached a point where I could no longer maintain the level of
participation or commitment that Dynegy deserves and requires as the company
executes its plan," Riley said. "I am proud to have served on a board whose
directors have worked diligently to develop and execute a solid strategy for the
company's future."

Riley's successor on the board has not been named.

Dynegy Inc. produces and delivers energy, including natural gas, power, natural
gas liquids and coal, through its owned and contractually controlled network of
physical assets. The company serves customers by aggregating production and
supply and delivering value-added solutions to meet their energy needs.
U.S. EAC Standards Board

Executive Board Officers

Name Title Officer 

Position

Designated 

State/Local Jurisdiction Party Affiliation Term Term Length

Janine Petty Senior Director of Voter 

Registration

Chair Local Arizona Republican 1

st 4/28/23 –

4/13/25

Derrin Robinson Harney County Clerk Vice Chair Local Oregon Unaffiliated 2

nd 4/28/23 –

4/13/25

Maria Pangelinan Guam Election Commission 

Executive Director

Secretary State Guam Unaffiliated 1

st 4/28/23 –

4/13/25

Kathy Placencia Director of Elections State Rhode Island Democrat Unexpired 

term

4/17/24 –

4/13/25

Nancy Boren Director of Elections and 

Voter Registration

Local Georgia Unaffiliated 1

st 4/28/23 –

4/13/25

Andrew Dowd Northborough Town Clerk Local Massachusetts Unaffiliated 2

nd 4/28/23 –

4/13/25

J. Bradley King Co-Director of the Indiana 

Elections Division

State Indiana Republican 1

st 4/28/23 –

4/13/25

Dwight Shellman 

III

County Regulation & Support 

Manager

State Colorado Unaffiliated 2

nd 4/28/23 –

4/13/25

Jameson Shew Douglas County Clerk Local Kansas Democrat 2

nd 4/28/23 –

4/13/25
f10q0913ex10cxxiii_attitude.htm


EXHIBIT (10)(123)







ALLONGE NO. 14 TO SECURED NOTE ISSUED FEBRUARY 22, 2012









This Allonge No. 14 to Secured Note (“Allonge”) is made as of this 28th day of October, 2013, by Attitude Drinks Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Borrower”) to Alpha Capital Anstalt (“Lender”).  Reference is hereby made to that certain Secured Note issued by Borrower to Lender dated February 22, 2012 (“Note”).  Except as amended hereby, the terms of the Note remain as originally stated.







The Principal Amount as stated on the face of the Note shall be increased to $1,730,000.00 ($175,000 – Principal Amount of Note dated February 22, 2012) + ($75,000.00 – Allonge #1 dated on or about 8/22/12) + ($150,000 – Allonge #2 dated on or about 10/15/12) + ($135,000 – Allonge #3 dated on or about 11/9/12) + ($165,000 – Allonge #4 dated on or about 12/6/12) + ($165,000 – Allonge #5 dated on or about 1/13/12) + ($220,000 – Allonge #6 dated on or about 1/14/13) + ($40,000 – Allonge #7 on or about February 15, 2013) + ($71,500 – Allonge #8 on or about 4/11/13) + ($88,000 – Allonge #9 on or about June 5, 2013) and + ($88,000 – Allonge #10 on or about 6/22/13) + ($82,500 – Allonge #11 on or about 7/23/13) + ($110,000 – Allonge #12 on or about 8/8/13) + ($110,000 – Allonge #13 on or about 8/8/13) + ($55,000 – Allonge #14 hereto).   The amendment to the Principal Amount due and owing on the Note described herein notwithstanding, Lender does not waive interest that may have accrued at a default rate of interest and liquidated damages, if any, that may have accrued on the Note through the date of this Allonge, which default interest and liquidated damages, if any, remain outstanding and payable.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Allonge is executed as of the date written above.







ATTITUDE DRINKS INC.


 




	
By: 

	/s/ Roy G. Warren	 
	
Name:

	Roy G. Warren	 
	
Title:

	President and CEO
SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF RESIGNATION OF RACHELLE J. NICOLLE, BAR NO. 5441. No. 70182 

# FILED MAY 0 9 2016

CHIEF DE 

### ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RESIGNATIO This is a joint petition by the State Bar of Nevada and attorney Rachelle J. Nicolle for her resignation from the Nevada bar.

SCR 98(5) provides that Nevada attorneys who are not actively practicing law in this state may resign from the state bar if certain conditions are met. The petition includes statements from state bar staff confirming that no disciplinary, fee dispute arbitration, or client security fund matters are pending against Nicene; and that she is current on all membership fee payments and other financial commitments relating to her practice of law in this state. 

### See SCR 98(5)(a)(1)-(2).

Bar counsel has recommended that the resignation be approved, and the Board of Governors has approved the application for resignation. 

### See SCR 98(5)(a)(2). Nicolle acknowledges that her resignation is irrevocable and that the state bar retains continuing jurisdiction with respect to matters involving a past member's conduct prior to resignation. 

### See SCR 98(5)(c)-(d). Finally, Nicolle has submitted an affidavit of compliance with SCR 

### 115. 

### See SCR 98(5)(e).

(0) I947A er• 

# 16,-4-13e)\ DO/A—et ile-1 Douglas 

# I ttP_A J.

Cherr
J. Saitta
J.

J. The petition satisfies the requirements of SCR 98(5). Accordingly, we approve attorney Rachelle J. Nicolle's resignation. SCR 98(5)(a)(2). The petition is hereby granted.

It is so ORDERED.

Parraguirre
Hardesty

cc: Rachelle J. Nicolle C. Stanley Hunterton, Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada Perry Thompson, Admissions Officer, U.S. Supreme Court

SUPREME COURT OF NV/ADA 2 (0) 1947A 0
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                         
<ARTICLE>                                     BD

                                               
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                  OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                        5,811,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                 6,820,000
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                           0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                         0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                           7,086,000
<PP&E>                                        2,135,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                28,199,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                  0
<PAYABLES>                                    0
<REPOS-SOLD>                                  0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                           0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                            516,000
<LONG-TERM>                                   499,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   114,000
<COMMON>                                      1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    23,133,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  28,199,000
<TRADING-REVENUE>                             (1,486,000)
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                          326,000
<COMMISSIONS>                                 6,831,000
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                 104,000
<FEE-REVENUE>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            0
<COMPENSATION>                                7,021,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (6,310,000)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (4,320,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.53)
                                               
 

</TABLE>
DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY 

8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD, STOP 6201

FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060-6201

May 17, 2024 

MEMORANDUM FOR DISTRIBUTION C 

SUBJECT: Policy Statement on Military Equal Opportunity 

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) is committed to fostering an 

environment wherein all Military Service members are treated with dignity and respect, and 

where all Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen, Guardsmen, and Guardians are provided a working 

environment that is free from unlawful discrimination. 

DTRA is dedicated to ensuring equal employment opportunity for its entire workforce 

regardless of their race, religion, color, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity and sexual 

orientation), national origin, age, genetic information, or disability. All Service members have

the freedom to compete on a fair and level playing field with equal opportunity for competition. 

Equal employment opportunity covers all Service members and employment programs, 

management practices, and decisions. This includes, but is not limited to, recruitment and

hiring, merit promotion, transfer, reassignments, training and career development, benefits, and 

separation.

DTRA Service members bring a rich diversity of experience and talent that enhances our 

ability to achieve our critical global mission. DTRA will not tolerate discrimination or

workplace harassment, and the Agency will correct any harassing conduct before it becomes 

severe or pervasive. Service members have my absolute assurance that I, along with all senior 

leaders, managers, and supervisors, will continue to promote an environment free from personal, 

social, or institutional barriers that impede their ability to contribute fully to our mission and to

grow personally and professionally. 

If incidents occur that violate this policy, I expect our Service members to seek prompt 

resolution at the lowest level by using their chain of command. Any matter that cannot be 

resolved should be brought to the attention of the Equal Employment Opportunity (EO) Office at

DTRA Ft Belvoir Org Mailbox DTRA EEO and MEO Complaints (dtra.belvoir.org.mbx.dtraeeo-and-meo-complaints@mail.mil). Reprisal against anyone who engages in protected activity 

will not be tolerated, and the Agency supports the ability of all Service members to exercise their

rights under civil rights statutes.

The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process is also available to Service members

and should be considered for conflict resolution, if appropriate. Please contact EO for further 

information on the ADR process. Complaints will be promptly and thoroughly investigated, and 

appropriate action will be taken if complaints are substantiated.

Rebecca K.C. Hersman

Director
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Threat Reduction Agency
                    Defense Threat Reduction Agency
            Search
                        Search Defense Threat Reduction Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Threat Reduction Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    About
    
        DTRA Leadership

    DTRA History

    Mission

    Strategic Initiatives

    Foreign Malign Influence

    Agency Overview Brief (pdf)

    Agency Financial Report

    Careers & Opportunities
    
        Your Civilian Career

    Your Military Career

    Welcome Aboard

    Diversity and Inclusion

    Business
    
        DTRA Contract Award Data

    Office of Small Business

    Mentor Protege Program

    News & Media
    
        Press Center

    Contact Us

    Joint Operations Center  DTRA News
 Download
 Details
 Share
 Download
 Details
 Share
 Download
 Details
 Share
 News
 Defense Threat Reduction Agency Celebrates Vaccine Lab Upgrades with Government of Kenya By Andrea Chaney
                Defense Threat Reduction Agency
 www.dtra.mil.
 SHARE
 PRINT
 
 ABOUT DTRA DTRA provides cross-cutting solutions to enable the Department of Defense, the United States Government, and international partners to deter strategic attack against the United States and its allies; prevent, reduce, and counter WMD and emerging threats; and prevail against WMD-armed adversaries in crisis and conflict.
 LEARN MORE News & Media»
 News Articles»
 Operating Status»
 Careers and Opportunities»
 Directions to DTRA»
 DTRA Operations Center»
 FOIA/Privacy»
 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Office»
 Accessibility»
 IG Hotline »
 No Fear Act Data»
 Information Quality»
 CONNECT WITH US
 MORE LINKS USA.gov»
 DTRA Careers»
 Open Government»
 Plain Writing»
 DoD »
 Privacy & Security»
 508 Accessibility»
 External Link Disclaimer»
 DoD Web Policy»
  8725 John J. Kingman Rd., Fort Belvoir, Va. 22060-6221 Welcome to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency’s website. If you are looking for the official source of information about the DoD Web Policy, please visit https://dodcio.defense.gov/DoD-Web-Policy/. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency is pleased to participate in this open forum in order to increase government transparency, promote public participation, and encourage collaboration. Please note that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency does not endorse the comments or opinions provided by visitors to this site. The protection, control, and legal aspects of any information that you provided to establish your account or information that you may choose to share here is governed by the terms of service or use between you and the website. Visit the Defense Threat Reduction Agency contact page at Contact Us for information on how to send official correspondence. Site Map »
 Stay Connected
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
#### Andrew CHIEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William K. GROGAN; William K. Grogan & Associates, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-1944

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 26, 2018

Decided: February 7, 2018

Andrew Chien, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholas Foris Simopoulos, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff Andrew Chien commenced this action against Defendants William K, Gro-gan and William K. Grogan & Associates, alleging that Grogan conspired with others .to unlawfully confine Chien and transfer certain of Chien’s assets to a third party as part of a debt-collection action in a Virginia state court in which Grogan served as a Commissioner in Chancery. Chien appeals from the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissing his complaint. We affirm.

Chien seeks to declare void a state-court judgment entered against him and in favor of Richard J. Freer; Under the *Rooker-Feldman** doctrine, “lower federal courts are precluded from exercising appellate jurisdiction over final state-court judgments.” *Lance v. Dennis,*546 U.S. 459, 463, 126 S.Ct. 1198, 163 L.Ed.2d 1059 (2006) (per curiam). This doctrine applies “to ‘cases brought by state-court losers complaining of injuries caused by state-court judgments rendered before the district court proceedings commenced and inviting [federal] court review and rejection of those judgments.’ ” *Id.*at 464, 126 S.Ct. 1198 (quoting *Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp.,*544 U.S. 280, 284, 125 S.Ct. 1517, 161 L.Ed.2d 454 (2005)).

Here, Chien lost in state court and. is now seeking to attack a judgment that preceded the instant federal action. That he cannot do. Accordingly, we affirm the *601district court’s dismissal of Chieris complaint pursuant to the *Rooker-Feldmcm*doctrine. We deny Chieris motion for an injunction invalidating Grogan’s order in the Virginia collection action. We also deny Chieris motion to expedite as moot. 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 in the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*

*

D.C. *Court of Appeals v. Feldman,*460 U.S. 462, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983); *Rooker v. Fid. Tr. Co.,*263 U.S. 413, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923).
#### Craig Clay THORNTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles L. RYAN, Warden, and Attorney General for the State of Arizona, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 16-16668

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*913Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 20, 2017

Craig Clay Thornton, Pro Se

David Andrew Simpson, Attorney, Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Respondents-Appellees

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Arizona state prisoner Craig Clay Thornton appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We dismiss.

The district court concluded that Thornton’s section 2254 petition was time-barred and, in the alternative, denied Thornton’s claims as proeedurally defaulted and without merit. It granted a certificate of ap-pealability as to the timeliness of the petition, but not as to its remaining rulings. In his opening brief, Thornton contends that the district court erred by dismissing his petition on timeliness grounds without providing him notice and an opportunity to be heard. He further contends that he may be entitled to equitable tolling or to delayed accrual of the limitations period pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(B).

The state has now waived the statute of limitations defense. Regardless of the waiver, we lack jurisdiction to review Thornton’s contentions because, in light of the district court’s alternative denial on the merits, a decision by this court regarding the timeliness of Thornton’s petition would not effect the result below. *See Preiser v. Newkirk,*422 U.S. 395, 401, 95 S.Ct. 2330, 45 L.Ed.2d 272 (1975) (“[A] federal court has neither the power to render advisory opinions nor to decide questions that cannot affect the rights of litigants in the case before them.” (internal quotation marks omitted)).

Thornton has not asked us to expand the certificate of appealability to include the district court’s rulings on procedural default or the merits. Although we may grant a certificate of appealability sua sponte, we decline to do so. *See*9th Cir. R. 22-1(e); *Hiivala v. Wood,*195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (requiring substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right).

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8456 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8456

 To amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to increase the 
                   criminal penalties under such Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 30, 2020

  Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
 referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to 
    the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to increase the 
                   criminal penalties under such Act.

    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 cited as the ``Securing Our Elections Act of 
2020''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR TAMPERING WITH OR 
              INTERFERING IN AN ELECTION FOR FEDERAL OFFICE.

    Section 12 of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (52 
U.S.C. 20511) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``fined in accordance with title 18, United 
        States Code,'' and inserting ``fined not more than $100,000'', 
        and
            (2) by striking ``imprisoned not more than 5 years'' and 
        inserting ``imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 
        15 years''.
                                 <all>
```