alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 56 (Monday, March 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 13883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7350]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5801-5]


Amendment to Common Sense Initiative Council, Automobile 
Manufacturing Sector Subcommittee Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of amendment to open meeting of the Public Advisory 
Common Sense Initiative Council, Automobile Manufacturing Sector 
Subcommittee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-
463, notice is given that the dates and times for the Common Sense 
Initiative Council's Automobile Manufacturing Sector Subcommittee 
meeting scheduled for March 26, and March 27, 1997, in Romulus, 
Michigan, have been amended.

AMENDMENT OF OPEN MEETING NOTIFICATION: Notice is hereby given that the 
Environmental Protection Agency, has amended an open meeting of the 
Common Sense Initiative Council's Automobile Manufacturing Sector 
Subcommittee (reference FRN dated March 11, 1997, 62 FR 11183) 
scheduled for Wednesday, March 26, and Thursday, March 27, at the 
Crowne Plaza Hotel, 800 Merriman Road, Romulus, Michigan. The 
Subcommittee will not meet on Wednesday, March 26, 1997. They will hold 
a one day meeting on Thursday, March 27, 1997. On March 27, 1997, the 
meeting will begin at approximately 9:00 a.m. EST rather than at 9:30 
a.m. EST, as previously scheduled. The meeting will end at 
approximately 3:30 p.m. EST.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: For more information regarding the amendment 
of this meeting, please call Alan Powell, Designated Federal Officer 
(DFO), at EPA, Region 4, by telephone on (404) 562-9045, or by fax on 
(404) 562-9068, or call Keith Mason, Alternate DFO, at EPA, on (202) 
260-1360.

    Dated: March 18, 1997.
Kathleen Bailey,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-7350 Filed 3-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1664

QUANG T. NGUYEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARVIN RUNYON, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-1054-A) Submitted: November 17, 1998 Decided: November 30, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Quang T. Nguyen, Appellant Pro Se. Leslie Bonner McClendon, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Quang Nguyen appeals from a district court order granting his employer summary judgment in an action filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended , 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 (1994). Nguyen contends that the United States Postal Service (“employer”)failed to grant him a promotion to an Electronic Technician position at its Dulles facility because of his race (Asian). Employer contends that Nguyen was not hired, among other reasons, because his score on the relevant entrance exam for the position was far below the scores of the successful applicants. Even assuming that Nguyen could establish a prima facie caseof discrimination, he could not prevail in this case without establishing that he was better qualified for the relevant position than the individuals actually selected. See Evans v. Technologies Applications & Serv. Co. , 80 F.3d 954, 960 (4th Cir. 1996). Because itis undisputed that Nguyen was not as well qualified as the successful applicants, we find that the district court properly granted employer’s motion for summary judgment. The district court’s order is therefore affirmed. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          18,901
<SECURITIES>                                    25,576
<RECEIVABLES>                                  173,843
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (7,923)
<INVENTORY>                                    342,705
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               586,168
<PP&E>                                         258,946
<DEPRECIATION>                                 130,770
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,148,735
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          249,627
<BONDS>                                        241,540
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        100
<COMMON>                                           100
<OTHER-SE>                                     438,630
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,148,735
<SALES>                                        735,856
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               735,398
<CGS>                                          531,975
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  701,106
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,606
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,680
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,876
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,804
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,804
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 3, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-60177 Summary Calendar

RIAZ MOMIN, Petitioner,

versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

-------------------- Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A95 455 372

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Riaz Momin, a citizen of India, petitions this court for review of an order of the denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirmed the denial of relief by the Immigration Judge (“IJ”). Momin contends that the BIA and IJ erred by determining that he had not shown a well-founded fear of persecution or that it was more likely than not that he would be subjected to torture ifNo. 05-60177 -2- he returned to India. However, because the record does not compel a finding that Momin was entitled to any of the relief he sought, Momin has failed to show that the decision was not supported by substantial evidence. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992); Faddoul v. INS , 37 F.3d 185, 188 (5th Cir. 1994).; Efe v. Ashcroft , 293 F.3d 899, 906-07 (5th Cir. 2002). Momin’s petition for review therefore is DENIED.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>



                                                                                                     Exhibit No. 11
                      HARDING LAWSON ASSOCIATES GROUP, INC.

                       Computation of Net Income Per Share
                      (In thousands, except per share data)
                                   (Unaudited)


                                                                            Three Months Ended August 31,
                                                                          1998                       1997

<S>                                                                       <C>                       <C>   
     Weighted average basic shares outstanding                             4,896                     4,887
     Net effect of dilutive stock options
         based on the treasury stock method.                                 103                        41

         TOTAL                                                             4,999                     4,928
==========================================================================================================

     Net income                                                           $1,013                     $ 920
==========================================================================================================

     Basic net income per share                                           $ 0.21                     $0.19
==========================================================================================================

     Diluted net income per share                                         $ 0.20                     $0.19
==========================================================================================================
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23

                  PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISE GROUP INCORPORATED

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

      We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement
Nos. 33-44581, 33-44582 and 33-45491 of Public Service Enterprise Group
Incorporated on Form S-8 and Registration Statement Nos. 33-49123 and 333-79101
of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated on Form S-3 of our report dated
February 11, 2000, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Public
Service Enterprise Group Incorporated for the year ended December 31, 1999.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Parsippany, New Jersey
February 25, 2000
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,622,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  3,668,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,944,000
<PP&E>                                      30,299,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              12,612,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              27,170,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,851,000
<BONDS>                                      9,700,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,895,000
<COMMON>                                     9,843,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 (5,639,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                27,170,000
<SALES>                                     14,079,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,079,000
<CGS>                                       11,959,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,971,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (66,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             260,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                914,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   914,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.31


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**PERCY THOMAS JOHNSON,**

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**PENNSYLVANIA STATE ATTORNEY**
**GENERAL KATHLEEN KANE,**

**SUPERINTENDENT OF SCID DALLAS**
**LAWRENCE MAHALLY, DISTRICT**

**ATTORNEY OF BUCKS COUNTY DAVID**
**W. HECKLER,**

**Respondents :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 67 MM 2016** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 21st day of June, 2016, the Application for Leav e to File Original** 

**Process is** GRANTED **, and the Petition for Writ of Prohibition is** DENIED

**.**
<PAGE>   1




                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 filed June 6, 1994, pertaining to the RVM Industries, Inc., Stock
Option Plan (formerly the Ravens Metal Products, Inc., Stock Option Plan) of our
report dated June 19, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of RVM Industries, Inc. included in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended March 31, 2000.





                                                          /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Akron, Ohio
June 19, 2000
July 30, 2015

Mrs. Heather Davis

Bird’s Eye View Aerial Science & Imagery

227 8th Street

Petaluma, CA 94952

Dear Mrs. Davis:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 13, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-1636), but 

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply

with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, 

you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
ALL AMERICAN SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES                   EXHIBIT 11.1

STATEMENT RE:  COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS (UNAUDITED)

QUARTERS ENDED MARCH 31                                     2000            1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE:

Net Income .....................................    $  1,210,000    $    194,000
                                                    ============    ============

Weighted Average Shares Outstanding ............       3,801,969       3,937,371
                                                    ============    ============

Basic Earnings Per Share .......................           $ .32           $ .05
                                                           =====           =====

DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE:

Net Income .....................................    $  1,210,000    $    194,000
                                                    ============    ============

Weighted Average and Dilutive Shares:
  Weighted average shares outstanding ..........       3,801,969       3,937,371
  Dilutive shares ..............................         193,087              --
                                                    ------------    ------------
                                                       3,995,056       3,937,371
                                                    ============    ============

Diluted Earnings Per Share .....................           $ .30           $ .05
                                                           =====           =====
# C_2022237EN.01006901.xml

| 20.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 237/69 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 237/69

---

Action brought on 28 April 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (doglover)

(Case T-231/22)

(2022/C 237/89)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Growth Finance Plus AG (Gommiswald, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for the EU word mark doglover — Application No 18 107 487

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 February 2022 in Case R 720/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 14183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7383]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket 74-40; Notice 11]


Insurance Cost Information Regulation; Correction

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of text and data for 1997 Insurance Cost Information 
Booklet; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Docket No. 74-40; Notice 9, as it appeared in the Federal 
Register on March 7, 1997, on page 10607, is incorrect. It should 
appear as Docket 74-40; Notice 10.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32302; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 
1.50(f).

    Issued: March 19, 1997.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-7383 Filed 3-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 54 (Thursday, March 20, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13391-13392]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7079]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[CA-060-07-1990-00]


Notice of Public Meetings

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, in accordance with Public Laws 92-463 
and 94-579, that the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, 
and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have scheduled a series of workshops 
to update the public on the status of the Northern and Eastern Mojave 
planning effort and gather comments on the framework of alternatives 
that will be addressed in the plan. The workshops are scheduled at the 
following locations:

Monday, April 14, 7-10 p.m., City Council Chambers, 1111 Baily Avenue, 
Needles, CA
Tuesday, April 15, 7-10 p.m., Cashman Field, 850 N. Las Vegas Blvd., 
Room 107, Las Vegas, NV
Wednesday, April 16, 7-10 p.m., Visitor Center Auditorium, Furnace 
Creek, Death Valley National Park
Thursday, April 17, 7-10 p.m., Eastern Sierra Fairgrounds, Sierra 
Street & Fair Drive, Bishop, CA
Friday, April 18, 7-10 p.m., Boulder Creek RV Park, Highway 395 (5 
miles south of Lone Pine), Lone Pine, CA
Saturday, April 19, 1-4 p.m., Dana Park Bldg., 850 South Barstow Road, 
Barstow, CA
Monday, April 21, 7-10 p.m., Holiday Inn---Magnolia Room, 303 East 
Cordova, Pasadena, CA
Tuesday, April 22, 7-10 p.m., Ramada Inn--Lakes Room, 2000 Ostrems Way, 
San Bernardino, CA
Wednesday, April 23, 7-10 p.m., Baker Community Center, Baker Blvd., 
Baker, CA
Thursday, April 24, 7-10 p.m., City Council Chambers, 100 California 
Ave., Ridgecrest, CA

    The conceptual planning alternatives will outline a range of three 
possible alternatives, plus the no-action alternative. The interagency 
team is seeking input from the public on the array of alternatives and 
the details that will be addressed in the planning effort.
    The 7.7 million acre planning area encompasses Death Valley 
National Park, the Mojave National Preserve, and BLM-managed public 
lands in parts of Inyo and San Bernardino counties. The interagency 
planning effort will guide the protection, public use and

[[Page 13392]]

development of the public lands within the planning area, and identify 
common management objectives, such as for wilderness areas, and reduce 
confusion for the public who use and recreate in these areas for the 
three agencies.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Dennis Schramm at the Mojave 
National Preserve, 222 East Main Street, Suite 202, Barstow, CA 92311 
or call (619) 255-884 or contact BLM public affairs in Riverside at 
(909) 697-5215. Information about the Northern and Eastern Mojave 
planning effort also is available at <a href="http://www.ca.blm.gov/mojave/
homepage.htm">http://www.ca.blm.gov/mojave/
homepage.htm</a>.

    Dated: March 14, 1997.
Jo Simpson,
Asst. District Manager, External Affairs.
[FR Doc. 97-7079 Filed 3-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-01-M
#### Sergio Fernando LAGOS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-1519.

Jan. 12, 2018.

Case below, 864 F.3d 320.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted.