alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

ANDREW DONALD PERINI , Appellant,

v.

DARCIA CHARLENE PERINI , Appellee

.

No. 4D 20

- 2096

[ August 4, 2021 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Dennis Bailey , Judge; L.T. Case No. 2018

- 014659 (41)

.
Jonathan Mann and Robin Bresky of the Law Offices of Robin Bresky, Boca Raton, for appellant.

M. Shannon McLin and Melissa Alagna of Florida Appeals, Orlando, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

The f ormer husband appeals the trial court’s amended final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We affirm

, without opinion

, all issues raised in the former husband’s appeal except the award of attorney’s fees. The trial court’s order determines entitlement to the attorney’s fees but does not ascertain the amount. An order for attorney’s fees that determines the entitlement but not the amount is unripe for appellate review. See Weimer v. Weimer , 677 So. 2d 86, 88 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). Thus, we dismiss without prejudice the appeal of this issue as premature. See Fredrickson v. Fredrickson , 47 So. 3d 975 , 975 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).

Affirmed in part; dismissed in part.

F ORST , K LINGENSMITH , and A RTAU , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000819694
<NAME> PEOPLES TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                       9,107,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,561,000
<ALLOWANCES>                               (4,912,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,209,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,761,000
<PP&E>                                     136,121,000
<DEPRECIATION>                            (53,938,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             171,655,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       31,063,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       159,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       14,756,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  57,598,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               171,655,000
<SALES>                                     33,483,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            33,483,000
<CGS>                                       33,429,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               36,495,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,067,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (11,096,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,500,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (9,596,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                            (12,100,000)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (121,000)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (21,817,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.37)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.37)
        

</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PAUL HUPP,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.
TERRANCE R. HUBBS; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 16

- 55266

D.C. No. 5:14

- cv

- 02560

- VAP

- SP

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Virginia A. Phillips, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2017 **

B efore: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Paul Hupp appeals pro se from district court’ s judgment dismissing his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging Fourth A mendment and state law claims. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s

dismissal for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedu re

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid ed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

APR 21 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 16

- 55266

12(b)(6)

. Naffe v. Frey , 789 F.3d 1030, 1035 (9th Cir. 2015) . We affirm

. The district court properly dismissed Hupp’s Fourth Amendment claim

arising out of defendant Hubbs’ alleged license plate check because Hubbs’ act of

running a license plate check to access Hupp’s home address did not constitute a

search under the Fourth Amendment and thus did not require probable cause. See

United States v. Diaz

- Castaneda , 494 F.3d 1146, 1152 (9th Cir. 2007) ( a police

officer does not conduct a search und er the Fourth Amendment when he sees a
license plate in plain view and uses it to access non

- private information about the

car and its owner ).

We reject as without merit Hupp’s various contentions about the district

court’s bias, its assignment of cases to particular judges, and its failure to provide

an opportunity for oral argument.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raise d for the first time on

appeal. See Pa dgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRM ED

.
No. 12-5932.

#### Brown *v.*Washington.

Sup. Ct. Wash. Cer-tiorari denied.
|                                                                                 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                         
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                   
|View History:                                                                    
|                                                                                 
|Virginia Natural Gas Deliveries to Electric Power Consumers  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                 
|                                                                                 
|Virginia Natural Gas Deliveries to Electric Power Consumers  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                 

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1  | Year-2  | Year-3  | Year-4  | Year-5  | Year-6  | Year-7  | Year-8  | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | -------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |         |         |         |         |         |         |         | 19,038  | 37,808  | 41,230 
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 36,700  | 33,118  | 34,936  | 35,256  | 48,784  | 66,951  | 60,321  | 90,573  | 76,983  | 94,829 
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 139,755 | 142,284 | 189,848 | 171,588 | 159,155 | 243,176 | 294,524 | 311,445 | 357,021 | 409,423
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 449,622 | 381,904 | 359,975 | 364,193 |         |         |         |         |         |        
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 73 (Wednesday, April 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 18656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-9732]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice (97-048)]


Government-Owned Inventions; Available for Licensing

agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

action: Notice of availability of inventions for licensing.

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

summary: The inventions listed below are assigned to the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration, have been filed in the United 
States Patent and Trademark Office, and are available for licensing.
    Copies of patent applications cited are available from the Office 
of Patent Counsel, Johnson Space Center. Claims are deleted from the 
patent applications to avoid premature disclosure.

dates: April 16, 1997.

for further information contact: Ed Fein, Patent Counsel, Johnson Space 
Center, Mail Code HA, Houston, TX 77058; telephone (281) 483-0837, fax 
(281) 244-8452.
    NASA Case No. MSC-22721-1: Blood Pump Bearing System;
    NASA Case No. MSC-22614-1: Whole Blood Staining Device;
    NASA Case No. MSC-22270-1-SB: Ammonia Monitor;
    NASA Case No. MSC-22358-2: Method for Production of Powders;
    NASA Case No. MSC-22595-1: Torque-Limiting Manipulation Device;
    NASA Case No. MSC-22513-1: Variable Resistance Elastomer Sensor.

    Dated: April 8, 1997.
Edward A. Frankle,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 97-9732 Filed 4-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-M
Exhibit 99.1

            ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.19

                             Argent Securities Inc.
             Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-W4.

            I, John P. Grazer, hereby certify that I am a duly appointed
Executive Vice President of Ameriquest Mortgage Company (the "Master Servicer"),
and further certify as follows:

            1. This certification is being made pursuant to the terms of the
Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of November 1, 2005 (the "Agreement"),
among Argent Securities Inc., as depositor, Ameriquest Mortgage Company, as the
Master Servicer and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as trustee.

            2. I have reviewed the activities of the Master Servicer during the
preceding year and the Master Servicer's performance under the Agreement and to
the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement throughout the year.

            Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set
forth in the Agreement.
<PAGE>

            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as
of 3/14/06.

                                                By: /s/ John P. Grazer
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                Name: John P. Grazer
                                                Title: Executive Vice President


            I, Denise Apicella, a (an) Assistant Secretary of the Master
Servicer, hereby certify that John P. Grazer is a duly elected, qualified, and
acting Executive Vice President of the Master Servicer and that the signature
appearing above is his/her genuine signature.

            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as
of 3/14/06.

                                                By: /s/ Denise Apicella
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                Name: Denise Apicella
                                                Title: Assistant Secretary
#### State v. Reed

110,766

04/21/2016

Denied.

51 Kan. 2d 107
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 International Automated Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Neldon Johnson, President and 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) 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/ Neldon Johnson


Neldon Johnson


President, Chief Executive Officer


February 18, 2011
From: Higgins, Cortney [mailto:Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 6:18 PM
To: Culligan, Kevin
Cc: Wayland, Robertj; Chappell, Linda; Elman, Barry Subject: RIA edits -- just a few

Hi Kevin,

For the building blocks analyses referenced in C hapter 3 that are forthcoming, can EPA allow OMB to see those before they are put in the docket? We want to make sure that these additional documents are clear enough for readers to understand.

Here are a few line edits on the RIA. The Chapter 3 comments are on the draft you sent us at 1:23 pm today. The others are on the consolidated document.

>>> P.9: There is a parenthetical missing from the note, commencing “Note that 2005 ...”

>>> p. 3-25: Footnote 31 – keep the first sentence and delete the second.

For this analysis, we quantified and imposed end-use EE costs and impacts on electricity demand exogenously. While these parameters can tech nically be endogenously represented in IPM or other power sector modeling, such modeling is no t typically designed to represent the extent to which the adoption of EE improvements are infl uenced by non-economic forces such as market failures

>>> p. 3-52: The note is a bit negatively worded. Suggest:

* This graph shows the population exposure in the modeling baseline used to generate the benefitper-ton estimates. Similar graphs for analyses with air quality modeling show premature mortality impacts at each PM2.5 concentration. Therefore, caution is warranted when interpreting this graph because it is not derived in a manner consistent with similar graphs from RIAs that had been based

on air quality modeling (e.g., MATS).
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 69 (Thursday, April 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 17598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-9218]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Meeting of the Defense Environmental Response Task Force (DERTF)

AGENCY: Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Environmental 
Security).

ACTION: Notice of business meeting and hearing.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of a 
business meeting and hearing of the Defense Environmental Response Task 
Force (DERTF). The DERTF is charged with studying and providing 
findings and recommendations on environmental response actions at 
military installations being closed or realigned. This meeting is a 
follow-up to the January 8-9, 1997 meeting. The DERTF will discuss 
issues related to unexploded ordnance, groundwater remediation, 
Superfund reform, other matters related to cleanup at closing military 
installations, and its 1997 Report to Congress. The DERTF will also be 
briefed on the cleanup program at Fort McClellan, Alabama. The business 
meeting and hearing will be open to the public. Public witnesses 
desiring to speak before the DERTF should contact Shah Choudhury, 
Executive Secretary, and prepare a written statement that can be 
summarized orally before the DERTF at the time to be fixed for public 
witnesses. Written statements must be received by the close of 
business, May 20, 1997, at the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Environmental Security).

Dates: June 17, 1997--9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.; June 18, 1997--9:00 a.m. 
to 8:00 p.m.; June 19, 1997--8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

Public Comment Period: June 18, 1997--7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

Addresses: Anniston Meeting Center, 1615 Noble Street, Anniston, AL.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Shah Choudhury, Executive 
Secretary, Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense 
(Environmental Security), 3400 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-
3400; telephone (703) 697-7475; e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#482b20273d2c203b2908292b3966273b2c66252124"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3e5d56514b5a564d5f7e5f5d4f10514d5a10535752">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: April 4, 1997.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-9218 Filed 4-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# t27p01p1
### The Honorab le Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge 1 

### for the Eastern District of Missouri. ___________ No. 96-3088

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Paul C. Turner, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: February 5, 1997 Filed: February 20, 1997

___________ Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Paul C. Turner appeals the 70-month sentence imposed by the district court after he pleaded guilty to attempting to possess with intent t o

1 distribut e more than 500 grams of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § § 841(a)(1) and 846. Turner argues he was entitled to an additional one

lev el acceptance-of-responsibility reduction under U.S. Sentencin g Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1(b)(2) (1995), as his former counsel caused the delay in his plea, and he provided the government timely notice of hi s intent to plead guilty after new counsel was appointed. We conclude the district court did not clearly err by refusing

### -2-

to grant the additional reduction. See United States v. Patterson , 11 F.3 d 824, 825 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam) (standard of review). By the time Turner pleaded guilty ten days before trial, the court had granted three continuances of the trial date and the government had fully prepared for trial. See United States v. Thompson , 60 F.3d 514, 517 (8th Cir. 1995). Turner may bring any claim he has for ineffectiv e assistance of counsel in a sepa rate proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 where the record can b e appropriately developed. See United States v. Sanchez , 927 F.3d 376, 378 (8th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Draft Appendix Q – Chesapeake Bay TMDL for Nutrients and Sediment

Q-1 September 24, 2010

Appendix Q. Detailed Annual Chesapeake Bay TMDL WLAs and LAs

This appendix presents the detailed annual WLAs and LAs for the Chesapeake Bay TMDL for 

nutrients and sediment in two spreadsheets:

Appendix Q-1: Detailed Annual Chesapeake Bay TMDL WLAs and LAs for Proposed 

Amended WQS (Q-1_ProposedWQS_AnnualLoads_092310.xls)

Appendix Q-2: Detailed Annual Chesapeake Bay TMDL WLAs and LAs for Full Back Stop 

Allocations (Q-2_FullBackStop_AnnualLoads_092310.xls)

Appendix Q-1 includes detailed nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment annual allocations to 

achieve the proposed amended WQS. Appendix Q-2 includes detailed nitrogen, phosphorus, and 

sediment annual allocations to achieve a full backstop TMDL, in case such controls are needed 

in the final TMDL (Section 8). Each of the spreadsheets list total nitrogen (TOTN), total 

phosphorus (TOTP) and total sediment (TSED) loads as both delivered to the Chesapeake Bay’s 

tidal waters and edge-of-stream (discharge to local waterbodies) (Section 9). Loading 

information is reported at both detailed and summary spatial scales and both detailed and 

summary source categories – working from general at the top of the worksheet to more detailed 

towards the bottom of the worksheet. Finer scale allocations are shown for each of the 92 

segments and by sources for WLAs including agriculture (CAFOs), stormwater (MS4s), 

wastewater (CSO) and wastewater (significant and nonsignificant by NPDES permit); and for 

LAs including agriculture, forest, non-tidal atmospheric deposition, onsite treatment systems, 

and urban sources.
|                                                                                  
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                  
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                          
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                    
|View History:                                                                     
|                                                                                  
|Tennessee Natural Gas Deliveries to Electric Power Consumers  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                  
|                                                                                  
|Tennessee Natural Gas Deliveries to Electric Power Consumers  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                  

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1 | Year-2  | Year-3  | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8  | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------ | ------- | ------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------- | -------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |         |        |         |         |        |        |        | 1,636  | 6,213   | 5,875  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 5,250   | 2,479  | 2,596   | 5,621   | 2,262  | 5,627  | 6,691  | 7,291  | 4,411   | 3,668  
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 22,156  | 26,314 | 62,961  | 36,613  | 45,083 | 69,752 | 87,692 | 75,576 | 103,092 | 118,725
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 104,984 | 98,578 | 122,371 | 108,843 |        |        |        |        |         |        
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024