alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14143-14144]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7486]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
[FEMA-1168-DR]


West Virginia; Amendment to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of West Virginia, (FEMA-1168-DR), dated March 7, 1997, and 
related determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 14, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster for the State 
of West Virginia, is hereby amended to include Public Assistance and 
Hazard Mitigation in those areas determined to

[[Page 14144]]

have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major 
disaster by the President in his declaration of March 7, 1997:

    The counties of Braxton, Cabell, Calhoun, Clay, Gilmer, Jackson, 
Kanawha, Lincoln, Mason, Putnam, Roane, Tyler, Wayne, Wetzel, Wirt, 
and Wood for Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation (already 
designated for Individual Assistance).

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 83.516, Disaster 
Assistance.)
Lacy E. Suiter,
Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 97-7486 Filed 3-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
No. 111,568

#### In the Matter of Richard Dean Dinkel, *Respondent.*

(333 P.3d 155)

In a letter dated August 26, 2014, addressed to the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, respondent Richard Dean Dinkel, an attorney admitted to the practice of law in the state of Kansas, voluntarily surrendered his license to practice law in Kansas, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 217 (2013 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 396).

At the time the respondent surrendered his license, review was pending before the Kansas Supreme Court on the final hearing report in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 212 (2013 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 375). The hearing panel found by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent violated Rule 8.1(b) (2013 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 646) of the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct when he failed to respond to information from a disciplinary authority; Rule 8.4(b) (2013 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 655) when he was convicted of two felonies and two misdemeanors involving dishonesty, trustworthiness, or fitness; Rule 8.4(c) when he engaged in conduct involving dishonesty; and Rule 211(b) (2013 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 356) by failing to file an answer to the formal complaint.

This court, having examined the files of the office of tire Disciplinary Administrator, finds the surrender of the respondent’s license should be accepted and that the respondent should be disbarred.

It Is Therefore Ordered that Richard Dean Dinkel be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in Kansas, and his license and privilege to practice law are hereby revoked.

It Is Further Ordered that the Clerk of the Appellate Courts strike the name of Richard Dean Dinkel from the roll of attorneys licensed to practice law in Kansas.

It Is Further Ordered that the Clerk of the Appellate Courts remove the case of Richard Dean Dinkel from the September 12, 2014, docket.

*661Dated this 3rd day of September, 2014.

It Is Further Ordered that this order shall be published in the Kansas Reports, that the costs herein shall be assessed to the respondent, and that the respondent forthwith shall comply with the provisions of Supreme Court Rule 218 (2013 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 406).
July 30 , 2015

Mr s. Heather Davis

Bird’s Eye View Aerial Science & Imagery

227 8 th Street

Petaluma, CA 94952

Dear Mr s

. Davis :

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

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

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

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your M ay 13 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 1636 ), but

we are unable to p rocess your request any further. The information you sent does no t 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 fro m 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 no t 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 effectiv e date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t 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
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Francis D. Gerace, President and Chief Executive Officer of Multi-Color Corporation (the
Company), certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended December 31, 2009 (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 results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: February 9, 2010



By:

/s/ Francis D. GeraceFrancis D. GeracePresident and Chief Executive Officer
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 Annual Report of Santa Fe Financial Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I David T. Nguyen, Treasurer and Controller of the Company,
serving as Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
to the best of my knowledge, 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 results of operations of the
    Company.


Date: October 17, 2005                          /s/ David T. Nguyen
                                                ----------------------------
                                                David T. Nguyen, Treasurer
                                                and Controller (serving as
                                                Chief financial Officer)




[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Santa Fe Financial Corporation and will be retained by Santa Fe
Financial Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.]
No. 12-5482.

#### Abram *v.*Gerry, Warden.

C. A. 1st Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 14411]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7576]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. TM97-2-127-000]


Cove Point LNG Limited Partnership; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

March 20, 1997.
    Take notice that on March 14, 1997, Cove Point LNG Limited 
Partnership (Cove Point) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC 
Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet, to 
be effective April 16, 1997:

Second Revised Sheet No. 7

    Coce Point states that the listed tariff sheets sets forth the 
restatement and adjustment to its retainage percentages, pursuant to 
the Section 1.27 of the General Terms and Conditions of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1.
    Cove Point states that copies of the filing were served upon Cove 
Point affected customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance 
with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of Cove Point's filings are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-7576 Filed 3-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 12-100.

#### Warmus *v.*Ohio.

Ct. App. Ohio, Cuyahoga County. Certiorari denied.
S95A1003.

#### WHITMIRE v. THE STATE.

(458 SE2d 849)

Hunstein, Justice.

David Whitmire was convicted of malice murder, felony murder, and aggravated assault in the shooting death of Eric Robinson. He was sentenced to life imprisonment for the malice murder and a concurrent 20-year sentence for the aggravated assault.1

1. Appellant contends the trial court erred by denying his motions for a directed verdict of acquittal. Evidence adduced at trial showed that appellant and the victim had been engaged in an ongoing argument over stereo amplifiers that the victim’s girl friend had given to appellant. Minutes prior to the murder, appellant and several friends called the victim out of his home to discuss the amplifiers, at which time appellant threatened to kill the victim. Moments thereaf*577ter, appellant shot the victim in the chest as he turned to reenter his home. After the shooting a witness heard appellant say to the victim, “[T]ake that.” Appellant was identified as the shooter by the victim’s girl friend. Several witnesses testified that the victim was not in possession of a weapon at the time of the murder and police found no weapons on the victim’s person or in the vicinity of the crime scene.

Decided July 14, 1995.

*Patrick G. Longhi,*for appellant.

*Lewis R. Slaton, District Attorney, Carl P. Greenberg, Carla E. Young, Assistant District Attorneys, Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, Susan V. Boleyn, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richard J. Warren, Assistant Attorney General,*for appellee.

Having reviewed the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s determination, we conclude that a rational trier of fact could have found appellant guilty of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt. *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979). Consequently, the trial court did not err by denying appellant’s motions for a directed verdict of acquittal. *Palmore v. State,*264 Ga. 108 (441 SE2d 405) (1994).

2. Under the facts of this case, the trial court should have merged the aggravated assault charge into the murder conviction. See *Montes v. State,*262 Ga. 473 (1) (421 SE2d 710) (1992). The conviction and sentence for the underlying charge of aggravated assault is therefore vacated.

*Judgment affirmed in part and vacated in part.*

*Benham, C. J., Fletcher, P. J., Sears, Carley and Thompson, JJ., concur.*

1

 The crimes occurred on April 4, 1993. Whitmire was indicted May 25, 1993 in Fulton County. He was found guilty on all counts. Verdict and sentence were filed November 18, 1994. A notice of appeal was filed on December 9, 1994. The transcript was certified March 15, 1995 and the appeal was docketed March 22, 1995. This appeal was submitted for decision without oral argument on May 15, 1995.
No. 11-11149.

#### Fears *v.*Robinson, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### *In re*Marriage of House

104,164

04/08/13

Denied.

Unpublished
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 974 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 974

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To amend the Federal Reserve Act to require the Vice Chairman for 
Supervision of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to 
           provide a written report, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Federal Reserve Supervision 
Testimony Clarification Act''.

SEC. 2. VICE CHAIRMAN FOR SUPERVISION REPORT REQUIREMENT.

    Paragraph (12) of section 10 of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 
247b) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating such paragraph as paragraph (11); and
            (2) in such paragraph--
                    (A) by striking ``shall appear'' and inserting 
                ``shall provide written testimony and appear''; and
                    (B) by adding at the end the following: ``If, at 
                the time of any appearance described in this paragraph, 
                the position of Vice Chairman for Supervision is 
                vacant, the Chairman or their designee shall appear 
                instead and provide the required written testimony.''.

SEC. 3. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

    The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying 
with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by 
reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional 
Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that 
such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 11, 2019.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
116th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 974

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To amend the Federal Reserve Act to require the Vice Chairman for 
Supervision of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to 
           provide a written report, and for other purposes.
```
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 International Automated Systems,
        Inc.
        (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB/A for the fiscal period ending September 30,
        2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
        (the “Report”), I, LaGrand T. Johnson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
        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 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.
 
 
 /s/
        LaGrand T.
        Johnson
 
 LaGrand
        T. Johnson
 Chief
        Financial Officer
 
 February
        21, 2006
EXHIBIT 10.3


                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION
                            -------------------------

                                  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 Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2002 of Elbit Systems Ltd. (the "Company") as filed with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") on the date hereof
(the "Report") and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section .1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Joseph Gaspar, Corporate Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, that:

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

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


                                               By:   /s/ Joseph Gaspar
                                                     -------------------
                                               Name:  Joseph Gaspar
                                               Title: Corporate Vice President
                                               and Chief Financial Officer
                                               Date: June 17, 2003

          A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to Elbit Systems Ltd. and will be retained by Elbit Systems
Ltd. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
No. 12-5600.

#### Carpenter *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
consolidated balance sheets,  consolidated statements of income and consolidated
statements of cash flows included in the Company's Form 10-Q for the three month
period  ended March 31,  1997,  and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements and the notes thereto.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY>                                           U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                          JAN-2-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                            APR-2-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                         1
<CASH>                                                     1,048,000
<SECURITIES>                                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             33,006,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                               1,120,000
<INVENTORY>                                                3,145,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                          47,372,000
<PP&E>                                                    35,770,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                            19,063,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                            90,769,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                     20,819,000
<BONDS>                                                            0
<COMMON>                                                  41,711,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                              0
<PREFERRED>                                                        0
<OTHER-SE>                                                         0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                              90,769,000
<SALES>                                                   26,168,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          26,168,000
<CGS>                                                     13,477,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             13,477,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          13,018,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              99,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           337,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             (763,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                (378,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         (385,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                    0
<CHANGES>                                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                                (385,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                   0.00

        

</TABLE>