alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14430-14431]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7707]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Report No. 2181]

Petitions for Reconsideration and Clarification of Action in 
Rulemaking Proceedings

March 21, 1997.
    Petitions for reconsideration and clarification have been filed in 
the Commission's rulemaking proceedings listed in this Public Notice 
and published pursuant to 47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of 
these documents are available for viewing and copying in Room 239, 1919 
M Street, NW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's 
copy contractor, ITS, Inc. (202) 857-3800. Oppositions to these 
petitions must be filed April 10, 1997. See Section

[[Page 14431]]

1.4(b)(1) of the Commission's rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an 
opposition must be filed within 10 days after the time for filing 
oppositions has expired.
    Subject: Regulation of International Accounting Rates. (CC Docket 
No. 90-337, Phase II).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 4.
    Subject: Streamlining the Commission's Rules and Regulations for 
Satellite Application and Licensing Procedures. (IB Docket No. 95-117).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 3.
    Subject: Implementation of Section 402(a)(1)(A) of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996. (CC Docket No. 96-187).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 3.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-7707 Filed 3-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
```
returned to the custody of real party in interest in Kansas pending an 

evidentiary hearing on the issue of custody modification. 

Petitioner has not demonstrated that the district court's order 

was in excess of the court's jurisdiction or rose to the level of an arbitrary 

or capricious exercise of discretion. See NRS 34.320; Int? Game Tech., Inc. 

v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 

(2008); Pan, 120 Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844; see also Ellis v. Carucci, 123 

Nev. 145, 149, 161 P.3d 239, 241 (2007) (recognizing the district court's 

broad discretionary powers in matters of child custody). Accordingly, we 

deny this writ petition, and we vacate the temporary stay imposed by our 

August 6, 2015, order. See Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 

674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (stating that a petition for 

extraordinary writ relief is purely discretionary with this court). 

It is so ORDERED. 

Saitta 

J. 

cc: Hon. Sandra L. Pomrenze, District Judge, Family Court Division 

David L. Mann 

Smith Legal Group 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and accompanies the quarterly report on Form
10Q (the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 of Marine Petroleum
Trust (the "Issuer").

I, R. Ray Bell, Principal Accounting Officer of the Issuer, certify that to my
knowledge:

     (1) the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Issuer at the dates and for the periods indicated.


/s/ R. RAY BELL
---------------------------------
R. Ray Bell
Principal Accounting Officer

Dated: May 21, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Marine Petroleum Trust and will be retained by Marine Petroleum
Trust and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1997 
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1997 
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1997 
<CASH>                                        112,868  
<SECURITIES>                                   50,000 
<RECEIVABLES>                              14,599,207
<ALLOWANCES>                                1,109,273 
<INVENTORY>                                         0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           20,656,060       
<PP&E>                                     30,707,687      
<DEPRECIATION>                             13,304,057    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             44,534,121      
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      20,073,284    
<BONDS>                                             0  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0 
<PREFERRED>                                         0 
<COMMON>                                    8,966,258 
<OTHER-SE>                                  4,865,561       
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               44,534,121         
<SALES>                                    71,693,518          
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           71,693,518          
<CGS>                                      40,239,762          
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              40,239,762          
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           25,201,245       
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0      
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            842,938       
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             5,520,362       
<INCOME-TAX>                                2,324,851      
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         3,195,511      
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0      
<CHANGES>                                           0  
<NET-INCOME>                                3,195,511 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .45 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .45 
        
                                  


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Lufkin Industries, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John F. Glick,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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.





/s/ John F.
Glick





John F.
Glick


Chief
Executive Officer


August
10, 2009





This
certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. §1350, and not for any
other purpose.
#### State v. Houser

108,588

02/12/14

Denied.

Unpublished
Bar Docket No. 13564

#### In the Matter of Gary W. Long, II, *Petitioner.*

(357 P.3d 877)

Dated this 24th day of September, 2015.

On January 27, 1998, petitioner, Gaiy W. Long, II, surrendered his license to practice law in Kansas. Under Supreme Court Rule 217 (2014 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 403), on March 6, 1998, this court disbarred petitioner from tire practice of law in Kansas. See *In re Long,*264 Kan. 2, 957 P.2d 1105 (1998).

Following a hearing, a hearing panel of the Kansas Roard for Discipline of Attorneys recommended to the court that petitioner s license to practice law be reinstated, conditioned on petitioner first taking and passing the Kansas bar examination. After careful consideration, tire court accepted the recommendation of the hearing panel. Petitioner took and passed the July 2015 Kansas bar examination.

It Is Therefore Ordered that petitioner be reinstated to die practice of law in Kansas conditioned upon his compliance with the annual continuing legal education requirements and upon his payment of all fees required by the Clerk of the Appellate Courts and the Kansas Continuing Legal Education Commission. Upon proof provided to the Clerk of the Appellate Courts that petitioner has complied with the annual continuing legal education requirements and has paid the fees required by the Clerk of the Appellate Courts and the Kansas Continuing Legal Education Commission, the Clerk is directed to enter petitioner s name upon the roster of attorneys engaged in the practice of law in Kansas.

It Is Further Ordered that this order be published in the official Kansas Reports.
| | Electronic Equipment (36)All (20-39)Food (20)Textiles (22)Apparel (23)Lumber (24)Furniture (25)Paper (26)Printing (27)Chemicals (28)Refineries (29)Rubber (30)Stone, Clay & Glass(32)Primary Metals (33)Fabricated Metals (34)Machinery (35)Instruments (38)Miscellaneous Manufacturing (39)
    This major group
    includes establishments engaged in manufacturing machinery, apparatus, and supplies for
    the generation, storage, transmission, transformation, and use of electrical energy.If you found this information useful,
    please try...Energy
        Consumption
      Use of
        Energy
      Electricity
      Manufacturing
        Floorspace
      Prices
      Energy
        Storage
      Energy and
        Operating Ratios
      Energy-Management
        Activities
      Technology
      Fuel-Switching
        Capability
      Motors | Figure on  ratio of energy consumed per 1992 constant dollar for SIC 36***Source: Table 12 of this
    report.***Figure on energy consumed by quadrillion Btu for SIC 36***Sources: Energy Information Administration, 1985, 1988, 1991,
    and 1994 MECS.***
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

arrow to top of pageTop
of Pagearrow to previous pageEnergy
Intensity Page



File Last Modified: 8/25/98

Contact:
  robert.adler@eia.doe.gov
  Robert Adler
  MECS Survey Manager
  Phone: (202) 586-1134
  Fax: (202) 586-0018

mark.schipper@eia.doe.gov
  Mark Schipper
  Phone: (202) 586-1136
  Fax: (202) 586-0018

http://www.eia.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs94/ei/**ei_36.html**separater lineIf you are having any technical
problems with this site, please contact the EIA Webmaster at wmaster@eia.doe.gov separater line
Appendix A: Analysis Request Letter 

Energy Information Administration / Energy Market and Economic Impacts of H.R. 2454, the ACESA of 2009 47
Energy Information Administration / Energy Market and Economic Impacts of H.R. 2454, the ACESA of 2009 48
S95A1241.

#### WEEKS v. THE STATE.

(458 SE2d 851)

Fletcher, Presiding Justice.

Demetrius Weeks challenges his malice murder conviction for the shooting death of Curtis Tarver.1 Finding that there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict, we affirm.

The evidence shows that a neighborhood resident heard three *578gunshots, a person crying inside a house, and someone saying, “Shorty Red, why did you shoot me?” The witness identified Weeks as the man carrying a handgun as he left the house where the shooting occurred. Before dying, Tarver told police that Shorty Red shot him. A second witness testified that Weeks was known as Shorty Red. After reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s determination of guilt, we conclude that a rational trier of fact could have found Weeks guilty of the crime charged. *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).

Decided July 14, 1995.

*Patrick G. Longhi,*for appellant.

*Lewis R. Slaton, District Attorney, Charles T. Shean III, Assistant District Attorney, Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, Susan V. Boleyn, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richard J. Warren, Assistant Attorney General,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

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

1

 The shooting occurred on July 21,1993, and the grand jury indicted Weeks on November 9,1993. On October 14,1994, a jury found Weeks guilty of malice murder, felony murder, and aggravated assault and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment after merging the felony murder and aggravated assault convictions into the malice murder conviction. Weeks filed a notice of appeal on October 21, 1994. The appeal was docketed on April 25, 1995, and the case was submitted for decision without oral argument on June 19, 1995.
No. 12-5573.

#### Henderson *v.*Pennsylvania.

Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.
Exhibits
**Exhibit 23.4**
**Consent of Registered Independent PublicAccountants**We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8(Nos. 333-7410, 333-7412, 333-11022, 333-13384, 333-102183and 333-97935) of Royal Dutch Petroleum Company of our reportdated May 22, 2004, except for Note 2(b) (SecondRestatement of previously issued financial statements) andNote 18 (Subsequent events) which are as of March 3,2005 relating to the Financial Statements of Royal DutchPetroleum Company which is included in this Amendment No. 2to the 2003 Annual Report on Form 20-F.
/s/ KPMG Accountants N.V.---------------------------------------------------------------
**KPMG Accountants N.V.,****The Hague - The Netherlands**
March 3, 2005 Royal Dutch/Shell Group of Companies **E5** 20-F/A (Amendment No. 2) 2003
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2019020EN.01000901.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 16.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 20/9 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9223 — Stena Rederi/Hyundai Glovis/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 20/09)

1.

On 9 January 2019, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2019020EN.01000901-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Stena Rederi AB (‘Stena Rederi’, Sweden), controlled by Stena AB (Sweden), part of the Stena Sphere (consisting of Stena AB, Stena Sessan AB and Stena Metall AB), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Glovis Europe GmbH (‘Glovis Europe’, Germany), controlled by Hyundai Glovis CO., LTD (‘Hyundai Glovis’, South Korea). |

Stena Rederi and Glovis Europe acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of a newly created joint venture that will mainly operate short-sea transport services on Pure Car and Truck Carrier (PCTC) vessels in Europe.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   for Stena Rederi: supports the shipping activities of Stena AB by providing shipbuilding, crewing and technical services;

—   for Glovis Europe: provides logistics services for finished vehicles and parts, and supports the global deep-sea activities of its parent Hyundai Glovis, an integrated global logistics and distribution company.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2019020EN.01000901-E0002) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9223 — Stena Rederi/Hyundai Glovis/JV

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| |
| --- |
| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2019020EN.01000901-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2019020EN.01000901-E0002)  [OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---
No. 12-5222.

#### Eldridge *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Order filed April 24, 2014. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-00466-CR

____________

WILLIAM TYRONE WASHINGTON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1345408

ORDER

The clerk’s record was filed July 5, 2012. Our review has determined that a 

relevant item has been omitted from the clerk’s record. See Tex. R. App. P.

34.5(c). The record does not contain a certified bill of costs.

The Harris County District Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s 

record on or before May 22, 2014, containing a certified bill of costs.

PER CURIAM
#### State v. Burris

106,617

11/06/13

Denied

Unpublished
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 24

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

                            ROYAL APPLIANCE MFG. CO.

     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS; that Royal Appliance Mfg. Co. and each
person whose name is signed below hereby constitute and appoint Michael J.
Merriman and Richard G. Vasek, or both of them, their attorney-in-fact and
agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for and on behalf of
Royal Appliance Mfg. Co. and the undersigned Directors and officers of Royal
Appliance Mfg. Co., to sign Royal Appliance Mfg. Co.'s Annual Report on Form
10-K, any or all amendments thereto, and to file the same, with exhibits thereto
and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, granting such attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to
do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary in
connection with such matters and hereby ratifying and confirming all that such
attorney-in-fact and agent or his substitute or substitutes may do or cause to
be done by virtue hereof.

     This Power of Attorney of Royal Appliance Mfg. Co. and the Directors and
officers of Royal Appliance Mfg. Co. may be executed in multiple counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original with respect to the person executing
it.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Power of Attorney has been signed at Cleveland,
Ohio this 14th day of March, 2001.


                    ROYAL APPLIANCE MFG. CO.


                    By:  /s/ Richard G. Vasek
                        -------------------------------------------------------
                        Richard G. Vasek, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary



                                   DIRECTORS

 /s/ Jack Kahl Jr.                                     /s/ Michael J. Merriman
------------------------                              --------------------------
Jack Kahl Jr.                                         Michael J. Merriman


 /s/ E. Patrick Nalley                                /s/ Joseph B.Richey, II
------------------------                              --------------------------
E. Patrick Nalley                                     Joseph B. Richey, II


 /s/ John P. Rochon                                    /s/ R. Louis Schneeberger
------------------------                              --------------------------
John P. Rochon                                        R. Louis Schneeberger
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

UNITED ACCESS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC (F ORMERLY I NLINE C ONNECTION C ORPORATION , B ROADBAND T ECHNOLOGY I NNOVATIONS , LLC, AND P IE S QUARED , LLC), Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

EARTHLINK, INC., Defendant-Cross Appellant.

____________________

2010-1251, -1273

______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in consolidated case nos. 02-CV-0272 and 02-CV-0477, Magistrate Judge Mary Patricia Thynge.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

J EFFREY R. B RAGALONE , Shore Chan BragaloneDePumpo LLP, of Dallas, Texas, argued for plaintiffappellant. On the brief were A LFONSO G ARCIA C HAN and
T HERESA M. D AWSON and D ANIEL F. O LEJKO

.

M ATTHEW C. G AUDET , Duane Morris, LLP, of Atlanta, Georgia, argued for defendant-cross appellant. With him on the brief were L. N ORWOOD J AMESON and L EAH J.
P OYNTER

.

______________________T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM ( Chief Judge R ADER
, L INN , and D YK
, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

October 12, 2011 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date Jan Horbaly Clerk