alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 94 (Friday, May 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 27084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12972]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA-1209-DR]


Georgia; 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 Georgia, (FEMA-1209-DR), dated March 11, 1998, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madge Dale, 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 Georgia, is hereby amended to include the following areas among 
those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the 
catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of March 11, 1998:

Gordon County for Public Assistance (already designated for 
Individual Assistance).
Columbia, Peach, and Rockdale Counties for Individual Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community 
Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis 
Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression 
Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 
83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 
83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)
Lacy E. Suiter,
Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 98-12972 Filed 5-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
Exhibit 10.12


 


Transfer Agreement for Greenhouse


 


Party
A: Harbin Hainan Kangda Cactus Hygienical Food Co., Ltd.


Party
B: Beian Huashengnongfeng Planting Base


 


Under the principle of mutual support, mutual
benefit and common development, Party A and Party B have entered into the
following agreement:


 


1.               Part A transfers
its greenhouse and related appurtenance within the Part B to part B in a lump.
Total transferring accounts for 950,000 RMB


2.               Facilities and
equipments have a good condition, doors and windows also have a good condition,
the supply of water and electricity is normal.


3.               After the Party B
received greenhouse from part A and confirm it have a good condition, Party B
will take charge of all the accidents such as damage and being stolen.


4.               Payment style:
Within three days after the subscription of this agreement, that is on Jan 16th,2006, party B will pay
250,000 RMB to Party A, on March 20th2006,
party B will pay 300,000 RMB to Party A and on May 19th 2006, party B will pay
400,000 RMB to Party A.


 


This Contract is executed in two
counterparts, one for each party. The Contract will enter into effect upon
execution and seals of the both parties.


 


Party
A: Harbin Hainan Kangda Cactus Hygienical Food Co., Ltd.


 


Authorized
Representative (Sealed): Chengzhi Wang


 


Party
B: Beian Huashengnongfeng Planting Base


 


Authorized
Representative (Sealed): Hua Su


 


January 11,
2006
|                                                                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                                 
|View History:                                                                                        
|                                                                                                     
|Kansas Natural Gas Delivered to Residential Consumers for the Account of Others  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                     
|                                                                                                     
|Kansas Natural Gas Delivered to Residential Consumers for the Account of Others  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        | 300    | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 3      | 4      | 4      | 971    | 8      | 8      | 9      | 8     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 7      | 8      | 8      |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
No. 11-9137.

#### Johnson *v.*Securities and Exchange Commission.

C. A. 11th Cir. Motion of petitioner to defer consideration of motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*denied. Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pau-peris [ante,*p. 809] denied.
exhibit_10-1.htm










Exhibit 10.1


 


AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT







THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the "Amendment") is entered into as of this 21 day of March 2012, by and between Ormat Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Employer"), and Lucien Bronicki (the "Employee").







WHEREAS, the parties hereto previously entered into an employment agreement dated as of July 1, 2004 (the "Employment Agreement"); and







WHEREAS, the Employer and the Employee are interested in modifying the Agreement to extend its term for an additional two (2) years, all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Amendment;







NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree to amend the Agreement as follows:







1.           Renewal.   The parties hereby agree to extend the Agreement for a renewal term of two (2) years until June 30, 2014.


 


2.           Continued Validity.     Except as specifically modified by this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall continue to govern the business relationship between the parties.  In the event of any inconsistency between the terms of this Amendment and the terms of the Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control.







3.           Entire Agreement.  This Amendment and the Agreement constitute the entire agreement and understanding between the parties respective the employment of the Employee with the Employer.  Any modifications to this Amendment or the Agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties







4.           Governing Law.  This Amendment, the rights and obligations of the parties hereto, and any claims or disputes relating thereto, will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware (but not including the choice of law rules thereof).







5.           Counterparts.  This Amendment may be executed n several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and such counterparts when taken together shall constitute one and the same original.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Amendment.


 



	Ormat Technologies, Inc.	Lucien Bronicki
	 	 
	/s/ Yehudit Bronicki	/s/ Lucien Bronicki
	Name: Yehudit Bronicki	 
	Title:   CEO
#### Lisa Vitiello, Respondent, v Dwight D. Joyce, Appellant.

[770 NYS2d 364]

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated March 7, 2001, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated February 8, 2002, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was to direct him to reimburse the plaintiff the sum of $11,099.10 representing the amount paid by the plaintiff to satisfy a judgment against the defendant’s corporation.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the motion which was to direct the defendant to reimburse the plaintiff the sum of $11,099.10 representing the amount paid by the plaintiff to satisfy a judgment against the defendant’s corporation is denied.

*629The plaintiff commenced this action for divorce in August 1999. Pursuant to an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated May 24, 2000, Wayside Realty, Inc. (hereinafter Wayside), a corporation owned solely by the defendant, transferred a certain piece of real property to the plaintiff. On August 9, 2000, a judgment was entered against Wayside for an unpaid realtor’s commission.

In September 2000 the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a stipulation of settlement of the divorce action in which the parties set forth their separate debts; each party agreed to be responsible for her or his respective indebtedness. The debt owed by Wayside was not listed on the husband’s statement of net worth, and he retained sole ownership of Wayside pursuant to the parties’ stipulation.

On December 19, 2000, in the course of obtaining a mortgage loan for the real property, the plaintiff satisfied the judgment representing the unpaid debt of Wayside. The plaintiff then moved in the divorce action to hold the defendant in contempt for failing to pay this corporate debt, and for a judgment against the defendant for the amount of the satisfied judgment. She relied on the language of their divorce stipulation specifying that each party would be responsible for his or her own indebtedness. The Supreme Court granted that branch of the motion which was to direct the defendant to reimburse her the sum of $11,099.10 representing the amount she paid to satisfy the judgment. We reverse.

While the parties’ stipulation of settlement clearly and unambiguously provided that each party would be responsible for his or her own indebtedness, and that neither would make any claim against the other for the payment of any such indebtedness, there is simply no language in the stipulation of settlement, the general releases executed as part of the stipulation of settlement, or the judgment of divorce, requiring the defendant to reimburse the plaintiff for this corporate debt which the plaintiff voluntarily paid and the validity of which the corporation contests. Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was to direct the defendant to reimburse her the sum of $11,099.10 representing the amount she paid to satisfy the judgment. Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, McGinity and Crane, JJ., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MELINDA GABRIELLA VALENZUELA, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

IBRAHIM, Unknown; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-16051 

D.C. No. 2:16-cv-00683-NVWMHB 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Neil V. Wake, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 11, 2017**

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Melinda Gabriella Valenzuela appeals pro se from the 

district court’s judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action following an 

order denying her application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). We 

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

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided 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

JUL 18 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-16051 

interpretation and application of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), Washington v. L.A. Cty. 

Sheriff’s Dep’t, 833 F.3d 1048, 1054 (9th Cir. 2016), and for an abuse of discretion 

its denial of leave to proceed IFP, O’Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir. 

1990). We affirm. 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Valenzuela leave to 

proceed IFP because Valenzuela failed to plausibly allege that she was “under 

imminent danger of serious physical injury” at the time she lodged the complaint. 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1054-57 (9th Cir. 

2007) (discussing the imminent danger exception to § 1915(g)). 

AFFIRMED.
No. 12-6157.

#### Ponticelli *v.*Florida.

Sup. Ct. Fla. Certio-rari denied.
No. 12-6119.

#### Shere *v.*Florida.

Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.
156P17

#### DiCesare, et al. v. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority

Pits’ Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*

Allowed 05/26/2017
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of DCB Financial Corp (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John A.
Ustaszewski, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

         (1)    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

/s/ John A. Ustaszewski

John A. Ustaszewski
Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer
March 31, 2003
No. 12-7165.

#### Shi Chang Huang *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 99.1

August 19, 2005

Contact:      Steve Taylor

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



(509) 892-5287

Press Release 05-3

_________________________________________________________________________



HuntMountain Resources Announces New Trading Symbol,

Launches Updated Website



(SPOKANE, Wash.)  HuntMountain Resources (OTCBB:HNTM), formerly Metaline Mining & Leasing Company, is pleased to announce that its Common Stock has been assigned the new symbol HNTM for trading on the OTC Bulletin Board of the NASDAQ Stock Market.  HuntMountain shares will begin trading under the new symbol effective Friday, August 19th, 2005.  The symbol change completes the administration of Metaline Mining & Leasing Companys merger with and into its wholly owned subsidiary, HuntMountain Resources, as approved by the Companys shareholders at a special meeting held August 1st.



Also today, HuntMountain Resources launched its updated corporate website, www.HuntMountain.com, and will regularly post news releases, financial filings, and information regarding company exploration and development projects.  All shareholders, potential investors and professionals within the broader financial community are encouraged to visit the site for an introduction to HuntMountain Resources and subscribe to the newsletter for current updates on the Companys activities.



___________________________________________________________________________





HuntMountain Resources (formerly Metaline Mining and Leasing Company) is a U.S.-based junior exploration company engaged in acquiring, exploring and developing precious and base metals properties throughout North and South America.



This news release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, many of which cannot be predicted with accuracy, and some of which might not even be anticipated. This news release is neither a prospectus nor an offer to sell securities or stocks in the company. It is intended for informational purposes only.





FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:

Steve Taylor, Director of Investor Relations

HuntMountain Resources

(509) 892-5287 phone

(509) 893-5318 fax

staylor@huntmountain.com

www.huntmountain.com
|                                                                   
|-------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                     
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                     
|View History:                                                      
|                                                                   
|U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Re-Exports to China (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                   
|                                                                   
|U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Re-Exports to China (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                   

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 6,201  | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

          In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mills Music Trust. (the
"Trust") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to my knowledge:

          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
Trust.


Date: May 10, 2007                      /s/ Marcia Markowski
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Marcia Markowski
                                        Trust officer of The Corporate Trustee

*    The statements of cash receipts and disbursements reflect only cash
     transactions and do not include transactions that would be recorded in
     financial statements presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The
     Trust is required to distribute all funds received after payment of
     expenses. Accordingly, the Trust has not prepared any statements of
     financial condition or cash flows.