alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 9771]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5204]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration on Aging
[Program Announcement No. AoA-97-2]


Fiscal Year 1997 Program Announcement; Availability of Funds and 
Notice Regarding Applications

AGENCY: Administration on Aging, HHS.

ACTION: Announcement of availability of funds and request for 
applications to develop new statewide legal hotlines for older 
Americans and, in addition, to provide technical assistance and 
guidance to statewide senior legal hotline projects.

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

SUMMARY: The Administration on Aging announces that it will hold a 
priority area competition for grant awards for three (3) to four (4) 
model projects that demonstrate effective ways of planning, developing, 
and sustaining statewide senior legal hotlines, and for a project to 
provide appropriate technical assistance to statewide senior legal 
hotline projects.
    The deadline date for the submission of applications is May 15, 
1997. Prospective applicants should note that because of the 
specialized nature of this priority area, they should have a proven 
track record of experience in providing legal services to the elderly 
in order to compete successfully for project awards.
    Application kits are available by writing to: Department of Health 
and Human Services, Administration on Aging, Office of Program 
Development, 330 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 4274, Washington, DC 
20201.

    Dated: February 26, 1997.
Robyn I. Stone,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Aging.
[FR Doc. 97-5204 Filed 3-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-40-P
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-0868

_____________________________

D.W., mother of J.J., Jr., K.F., 

Jr., M.P. and M.P., minor 

children,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND 

FAMILIES,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

Denise R. Ferrero, Judge.

February 21, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. 

OSTERHAUS, C.J., and BILBREY and NORDBY, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Roderick O. Ford of The PMJA Legal Defense Fund, Inc. C/o The 

Methodist Law Centre, P.A., Gainesville, for Appellant.

Sara E. Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Stephanie E. 

Novenario, Senior Attorney, Appellate Division, Statewide 

Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee; Andrew Feigenbaum, 

Children’s Legal Services, West Palm Beach, for Appellee.
No. 11-10112.

#### Murray *v.*Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Brian Keith UZZLE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Lesley FLEMMING, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 17-7151

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 30, 2018

Decided: February 9, 2018

Brian Uzzle, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Elizabeth Baumgartner, Victoria Lee Johnson, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*612PER CURIAM:

Brian Keith Uzzle seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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 dis-, trict 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 petition 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 Uzzle has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We deny Uzzle’s motions to appoint counsel and for a transcript at government expense and 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*
#### William SCHEIDLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of WASHINGTON; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-35202

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*890Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 20, 2017

William Scheidler, Pro Se

Suzanne LiaBraaten, AGWA — Office of the Washington Attorney General (Olympia), Torts Division, Olympia, WA, for Defendants-Appellees State of Washington, Jesse Young, Michelle Caldier, Jan Angel

lone George, Attorney, Christine Palmer, Deputy Prosecutor, Kitsap County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, Port Orchard, WA, for Defendant-Appellee Kevin Hull

Thomas Scott, Pro Se

Sara Naheedy, Pro Se

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 **

William Scheidler appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging claims related to his 2010 property tax assessment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). *Hicks v. Small,*69 F.3d 967, 969 (9th Cir. 1995). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Seheidler’s action because Scheidler failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim. *See Ashcroft v. Iqbal,*556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (“To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); *see also Bogan v. Scott-Harris,*523 U.S. 44, 49, 118 S.Ct 966, 140 L.Ed.2d 79 (1998) (state legislators are entitled to absolute immunity from liability under § 1983 for their legislative activities); *Noel v. Hall,*341 F.3d 1148, 1163 (9th Cir. 2003) (“It is a forbidden de facto appeal under *Booker-Feldman*when the plaintiff in federal district court complains of a legal wrong allegedly committed by the state court, and seeks relief from the judgment of that court.”); *Ashelman v. Pope,*793 F.2d 1072, 1075 (9th Cir. 1986) (en banc) (explaining that “(jjudges and those performing judge-like functions are absolutely immune from damage liability for acts performed in their official capacities”).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in taxing costs against Scheidler because the requested costs are allowable. *See*28 U.S.C. §. 1920(1) (permitting court to include fees of the clerk as costs).

We reject as meritless Scheidler’s contentions that federal pleading standards are inapplicable, that the district judge was biased, and that the removal of his complaint from the state court was improper.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

*891All pending motions or requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                      19,052,308
<SECURITIES>                                13,670,710
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            33,000,196
<PP&E>                                       3,035,226
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,043,817
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,015,531
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,750
<COMMON>                                        12,990
<OTHER-SE>                                  31,966,539
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                36,043,817
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,493,349
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,838,235
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              81,774
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (8,344,886)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (8,344,886)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.66)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
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




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Telestone Technologies Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Hong Li,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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.




Dated: May
15, 2009




By:
              /s/ Hong LiName:
              Hong
      LiTitle:
              Chief
      Financial Officer (Principal Financial
Officer)
For Mac Users: Best Practices: Step-by-Step Guide To Customizable Graphics

Edit/Customize the motion graphic to best serve your constituency. Customize the graphic by inserting a specific logo and any copy you’d like.

Once you’ve designed a graphic, please follow the following steps:

Step 1: Click File, then Export 

Step 2: Select .MP4

Step 3: Match Export Setting to Screen Shot and Save Your New Graphic 

Step 4: Don’t Forget to Use the Hashtag #HelpAmericaVote 

Step 2

Step 1

Step 3

For Windows Users: Best Practices: Step-by-Step Guide To Customizable Graphics

Step 1

Step 3

Step 2

Step 4

Edit/Customize the motion graphic to best serve your constituency. Customize the graphic by inserting a specific logo and any copy you’d like.

Once you’ve designed a graphic, please follow the following steps:

Step 1: Click File, then Export 

Step 2: Select .MP4

Step 3: Match Export Setting to Screen Shot and Save Your New Graphic 

Step 4: Don’t Forget to Use the Hashtag #HelpAmericaVote 

2

# image2.png

# image3.png

# image4.png

# image5.png

# image1.jpg
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           6,954                  11,521
<SECURITIES>                                     4,785                   2,264
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,149                   3,458
<ALLOWANCES>                                       251                     159
<INVENTORY>                                      1,079                   1,195
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                16,249                  19,030
<PP&E>                                           4,058                   4,869
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,376                   3,171
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,211                  20,810
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,557                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             8                      11
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,337                  14,457
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    18,211                  20,810
<SALES>                                          5,522                   4,544
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,891                   5,969
<CGS>                                            2,596                   2,340
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,151                   2,876
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,744                   7,856
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2,829)                 (4,597)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         7                       7
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,836)                 (4,604)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2,836)                 (4,604)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.41)                  (0.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.41)                  (0.56)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           6,543
<SECURITIES>                                    34,842
<RECEIVABLES>                                   46,083
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    142,939
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               238,137
<PP&E>                                         267,142
<DEPRECIATION>                                 140,951
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 378,945
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          152,839
<BONDS>                                         89,800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           32,241
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      78,716
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   378,945
<SALES>                                        486,179
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               486,179
<CGS>                                          443,944
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  443,944
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,445
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,689)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (506)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,183)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    640
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (579)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)
        

</TABLE>
No. 11-9985.

#### McKay *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# C_2021289EN.01004401.xml

| 19.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 289/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/44

---

Action brought on 21 May 2021 — Troy Chemical and Troy v Commission

(Case T-297/21)

(2021/C 289/60)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Troy Chemical Co. BV (Delft, Netherlands) and Troy Corp. (Florham Park, New Jersey, United States) (represented by: D. Abrahams, H. Widemann and Ł. Gorywoda, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/348 of 25 February 2021 (1) in its entirety; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/348 of 25 February 2021 (1) in its entirety;

| — | take such other or further measure as justice may require; and |
| --- | --- |

—

take such other or further measure as justice may require; and

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that, in setting the three-year approval period for carbendazim, the defendant committed an error of law, misused its powers, breached legitimate expectations (derived from applicable guidance), breached the principle of non-discrimination and committed a manifest error of appraisal. |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that, in reaching the conclusion that ‘specific conditions’ were required to ban biocidal product authorisations for use in paints and plasters to be used outdoors, the defendant committed a manifest error of appraisal and a misuse of its powers. |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that, in reaching the conclusion that ‘specific conditions’ were required to ban placing on the market of specific treated articles (paints and plasters treated with/incorporating carbendazim) for use outdoors, the defendant committed a manifest error of appraisal as well as an error of law. |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that, in reaching the conclusion that ‘specific conditions’ were required for labelling of paints and plasters treated with/incorporating carbendazim for use outdoors to remind users of a ban on use outdoors, the defendant committed a manifest error of law and fact. |
| --- | --- |

4.

---

(1)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/348 of 25 February 2021 approving carbendazim as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 7 and 10 (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2021 L 68, p. 174-177).

---
#### ERIE INS. EXCHANGE v. LITTLE DUCKLINGS DAY CARE, et al.

168 EDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/27/2017

Reargument Denied 12/6/2017

June Term, 2016, No. 15-0602601 (Philadelphia)

Affirmed
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                                 NEWS RELEASE

                                        FOR:          Drypers Corporation
         
                                        APPROVED BY:  Walter V. Klemp 
                                                      Chairman & Co-Chief
                                                      Executive Officer
                                                      (713) 682-6848

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
---------------------

                                        CONTACT:      Howard Zar/Shannon Moody
                                                      Press: Michael McMullan
                                                      Morgen-Walke Associates
                                                      (212) 850-5600       



                         DRYPERS CORPORATION ANNOUNCES
                        INTENTION TO MAKE $100,000,000
                             PRIVATE DEBT OFFERING

        HOUSTON, TEXAS, May 22, 1997 -- Drypers Corporation (Nasdaq: DYPR) today
announced that it intends to make a private offering of $100,000,000 in 
aggregate principal amount of Senior Notes due 2007. The sale of the Notes is 
expected to be completed during the latter part of June, 1997. The net proceeds 
from the private offering will be used, among other things, to repurchase the 
Company's 12.5% Series B Senior Notes due November 1, 2002 pursuant to a tender 
offer and consent solicitation and to repay certain indebtedness and other 
obligations and for general corporate purposes.

        Drypers Corporation manufactures and markets disposable baby diapers and
related products under the Drypers(R) and other brand names. The Company's 
products are sold through grocery stores and mass merchants throughout the 
United States, Latin America and other international markets. The Company also 
produces other branded and private label diapers and related products.

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

        This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the 
solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of, the Notes 
referenced above in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale 
would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities 
laws of any such jurisdiction. The Notes will not be registered under the 
Securities Act of 1933 and, unless so registered, any not be offered or sold 
except pursuant to an exemption from or in a transaction not subject to the 
registration requirements of the Securities Act and any applicable state 
securities laws.
,(62UGHU1XPEHU

5HJLVWU\1XPEHU &$,QGH[1DPH