alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 406]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-28349]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: January 3, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 27, 2017, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 57 
to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, 
Docket Nos. MC2018-87, CP2018-129.

Elizabeth A. Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2017-28349 Filed 1-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Exhibit 32.1   Certification of CEO
      and CFOPursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350,As Adopted Pursuant
      toSection 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
   In connection with the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofORGANA GARDENS INTERNATIONAL INC.for the
Quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Christopher Scheive, as the
equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Company,  hereby certifies, 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 his
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 Partnership.  /s/Christopher ScheiveName: Christopher ScheiveDate: May 17, 2010  This
certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.
**EXHIBT 4.4****REVOLVING CREDIT NOTE**$14,000,000 July 2, 2007     On the Revolving Credit Maturity Date, FOR VALUE RECEIVED, North Pointe Holdings Corporation,a Michigan corporation (“Company”) promises to pay to the order of Comerica Bank (“Bank”) care ofComerica Bank, as Agent, at 500 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 48226, in lawful money of theUnited States of America, the sum of Fourteen Million Dollars ($14,000,000), or so much of said sumas may from time to time have been advanced and then be outstanding hereunder pursuant to theSecond Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of June 30, 2006, made by and among theCompany, certain banks, including the Bank, and Comerica Bank as Agent for such banks, as the samemay be amended from time to time (the “Agreement”), together with interest thereon as hereinafterset forth.     Each of the Advances made hereunder shall bear interest at the Applicable Interest Rate fromtime to time applicable thereto under the Agreement or as otherwise determined thereunder, andinterest shall be computed, assessed and payable as set forth in the Agreement.     This Note is a note under which advances (including refundings and conversions), repaymentsand readvances may be made from time to time, but only in accordance with the terms and conditionsof the Agreement. This Note evidences borrowings under, is subject to, is secured in accordancewith, and may be accelerated or matured under, the terms of the Agreement, to which reference ishereby made. Definitions and terms of the Agreement are hereby incorporated by reference herein.     This Note shall be interpreted and the rights of the parties hereunder shall be determinedunder the laws of, and enforceable in, the State of Michigan.     Company hereby waives presentment for payment, demand, protest and notice of dishonor andnonpayment of this Note and agrees that no obligation hereunder shall be discharged by reason ofany extension, indulgence, release, or forbearance granted by any holder of this Note to any partynow or hereafter liable hereon or any present or subsequent owner of any property, real orpersonal, which is now or hereafter security for this Note.     Nothing herein shall limit any right granted Bank by any other instrument or by law.     This Note amends, restates, supersedes, replaces and increases that certain Revolving CreditNote dated as of June 30, 2006, made in the principal amount of Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000)by Company payable to Bank, and the initial Advance(s) under this Note shall be deemed firstapplied, to the extent necessary, to repay the existing indebtedness of Company to Bank under saidNote; provided, however, the execution and delivery by Company of this Note shall not, in anymanner or circumstance, be deemed to be a novation of or to have terminated, extinguished ordischarged any of Company’s indebtedness evidenced by said Note, all of which indebtedness shallcontinue under and shall hereinafter be evidenced and governed by this Note.
1

 
       **NORTH POINTE HOLDINGS**
August 8, 2016

Mr. David Agranovich Leading Edge Aviation Resources, LLC
1201 N. Fillmore Street #207 Arlington

, VA 22201

Re: FAA

– 2016

– 1033

Dear Mr. Agranovich :

This letter is to provide notification that we have reviewed your petition for exemption, and have determined that we will continue to process your petition.

As referenced in the June 22, 2016, letter posted to your docket at www.regulations.gov

, we are reviewing pending Section 333 petitions to determine if the recently

- issued regulation, Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 107 ( www.faa.gov/uas ) will satisfy your request

. We have determined that

y our request requires further regulatory relief (Tier 3), and we will continue working on your petition for exemption

.

We have found that your petition, if granted, would set a precedent. Therefore, we will publish a summary of your petition in the Federal Register for public comments , if we have not done so already.

We will advise you of the agency’s final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding your petition, please contact me at 333exemptions@faa.gov

.

Sincerely,

/s/
Brenda Robeson Program A nalyst
EXHIBIT 23.1








Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm











The Board of Directors


BioCancell Therapeutics Inc.








We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No. 333-165602) on Form S-8 of BioCancell Therapeutics Inc. of our report dated March 14, 2011, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of BioCancell Therapeutics, Inc. as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders' equity (deficit) and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2010 and for the cumulative period from October 1, 2004 (inception of operations) to December 31, 2010, which report appears in the December 31, 2010 annual report on Form 10-K of BioCancell Therapeutics, Inc.





Our report dated March 14, 2011 contains an explanatory paragraph that states that the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations, which raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of that uncertainty.





/s/ Somekh Chaikin





Somekh Chaikin


Certified Public Accountants (Isr.)


A Member Firm of KPMG International





Jerusalem, Israel


March 14, 2011
1 NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

No s

. 124,158 124,159

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS

S TATE OF K ANSAS , Appellee ,

V

.
D ANIELLE N. A LLISTON , Appellant

.

M EMORANDUM OPINION

Appeal from Jackson District Court; N ORBERT C. M AREK J R

. , judge. Opinion filed April 15 , 20 22

. Appeal dismissed.

Submitted by the parties for summary disposition pursuant to K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21

- 6820(g) and (h).

Before M ALONE , P.J., S CHROEDER and H URST , J J.

P ER C URIAM : Danielle N. Alliston was convicted of possession of heroin in two separate district court cases. At the combined sentencing hearing, the district court denied
Alliston ' s motion for downward durational departure and imposed the presumptive gr id
box sentence of 20 months ' imprisonment in each case, to run concurrent, with 12
months ' postrelease supervision, consecutive to Alliston ' s sentence for a misdemeanor
conviction in another case

. See K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21

- 6805(a) (sentencing guidelines gr id for drug crimes). The misdemeanor case is not at issue in this appeal. Alliston ' s two cases were consolidated on appeal, and we granted Alliston ' s motion for summary disposition
in lieu of briefs under Supreme Court Rule 7.041A (2022 Kan. S. Ct. R. at 48)

.2 Alliston asserts the district court erred in denying her departure motion and in imposing the standard grid sentence over the mitigated sentence as set out in the grid box , but she conce des we do not have jurisdiction to review the imposition of a presumptive
sentence. See K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21

- 6820 (c)(1)

. Alliston further asserts the district court erred in ordering her present sentences be served consecutive ly to her sentence in ano ther
case. But , she likewise acknowledges we do not have jurisdiction to review this point.
See State v. Young , 313 Kan. 724, 740 , 490 P.3d 1183 (20 2 1) (appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review imposition of consecutive sentences when such disposition is authorized by statute)

.

Upon review of the record , even if we did have jurisdiction to address Alliston ' s issues on appeal, she has failed to show the district court abused its discretion.

Given the controlling precedent , we have no jurisdiction to consider Alliston ' s claims ; therefore , we dismiss her appeal.

Appeal d ismissed.
Eloise JARVIS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. The BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-0971

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
### The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

May 7, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00069

- CR

Charles Arthur WARREN

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR9856B Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice

On November 15, 2013, Charles Warren pled nolo contendere to the offense of possession of marijuana (50 to 2000 lbs.) and was sentenced to a term of six years’ deferred adjudication community supervision. On December 12, 2013, Warren filed a motion for new trial. On January 28,
2013, Warren filed a notice of appeal. The appeal is currently pending in this C ourt.

On April 16, 2014, Warren filed in this C ourt a motion to stay the terms of his community supervision. In the motion, Warre n represents that he filed a motion to stay the terms o f his community supervision in the trial court , but the trial court has not ruled on the motion.

On April 21, 2014, we issued an order advising the State that it could file a response to the

motion filed in this Court on or before May 2, 2014. No response was filed.

Under longstanding Texas case law, when an appeal is taken from a criminal judgment assessing a probated sentence , the terms of community supervision do not commence until t he judgment is final and the appellate mandate has issued. Humphries v. State , 261 S.W.3d 144, 145 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2008, no pet.) (citing Ross v. State , 523 S.W.2d 402, 405 (Tex. Crim. App. 1975); Delorme v. State , 488 S.W.2d 808, 810 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973); and Smith v. State , 478 S.W.2d 518, 520 (Tex. Crim. App.1972))

. Furthermore, this C ourt has the authority to grant a stay of the terms and conditions of community supervision during the pendency of an appeal from a judgmen t assessing a probated sentence

. See id . (granting the appellant’s motion for emergency relief, and ordering a stay of the commencement of the terms and conditi ons of community supervision until the appellate mandate issued).Accordingly, the motion to stay the terms of community supervision filed in this Court is GRANTED, and it is ORDERED that the commencement of the terms and conditions of Warren’ s community supervision is stayed until the mandate issues in this appeal.



### _________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 7th day of May, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
##### 



Exhibit 10.1
 2003-000016H
HEALTH INSURANCE CONTRACT
NO. 03-016H FOR THE
METRO-NORTH HEALTH REGION
BETWEEN
PUERTO RICO HEALTH INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION
AND
TRIPLE S, INC.
 18 th day of July, 2006 PUERTO RICO HEALTH INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION TRIPLE S, INC INSURER Socorro Rivas
 WITNESSETH
  WHEREAS: ADMINISTRATION INSURER st Metro-North Health Area/Region Bayamón, Cataño, Comerío, Corozal, Dorado, Guaynabo, Naranjito,
Toa Alta, Toa Baja and Vega Alta
 WHEREAS: ADMINISTRATION




---



##### 



WHEREAS: ADMINISTRATION Insurer
 HENCEFORTH:
 ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS
 In Article I, the following definition is amended and substituted to read as follows:
 CONTRACT TERM July
1 st , 2002 until September 30, 2006
 ARTICLE XVIII
 PAYMENT OF PREMIUMS
 In Article XVIII a new letter (c and d) to the paragraph three (3) is added to read as follows:
 3.
    
    The monthly premiums
 a.1.b.1.
 c.
    
    The aforementioned premium rates (FY 2005-2006, amendment number 03-016Gsigned
October 10, 2005) constitute the interim rates for the period beginning July
1st, 2006 to September 30, 2006,
until a final rate be
 2




---



##### 



negotiated and agreed
upon by the parties. Payments will be made from account number 5030-113.d.
    
    The interim rate shall be subject to an adjustment in the event there is a
difference between the interim and final agreed premium rate.
 ARTICLE XXVIII
  1.
    
    This contract shall be in effect starting at 12:01 AM Puerto Rico Time on July
1st, 2002, and is due on September 30, 2006.
 The present amendments take precedence and shall prevail over any remaining sections and articles
of the contract which are maintained but could conflict with these amendments.
 18 th day of July, 2006.
 /s/ Nancy Vega RamosNANCY VEGA RAMOS, MSc, HIA, MHPExecutive DirectorPuerto Rico Health Insurance Administration/s/ Socorro RivasSOCORRO RIVASChief Executive OfficerTriple S, Inc./s/ Luis A. MariniLUIS A. MARINI, DMDChief Executive OfficerTriple-C, Inc.
 3
Stanley HINESLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-3219

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 14, 2017]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 5, 2019

a0529 

# Order

Clerk June 5, 2019

158929

JAMIE PIKE,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 158929

COA: 336455

Wayne CC: 16

- 000062

- NF

FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE

COMPANY OF MICHIGAN,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave t o appeal the November 27, 2018

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the question presented should now be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM STATEMENT OF
NET ASSETS IN LIQUIDATION OF DAMSON BIRTCHER REALTY INCOME FUND - I AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-Q.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       7,416,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,482,000
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,482,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          273,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,209,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,482,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0<F1>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0<F1>
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0<F1>
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>STATEMENT OF OPERATION IS NOT PRESENTED IN LIQUIDATION BASIS OF ACCOUNTING.
</FN>


</TABLE>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT WALTER JOHN BROIS, DOC #539452, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-834 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed July 11, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Christopher C. Sabella, Judge. Walter John Brois, pro se. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Elba Caridad Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. CRENSHAW, LUCAS, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
EX-10.1



 





Exhibit 10.1




EXHIBIT A1




COMMITMENTS




	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Bank	 	Maximum Amount
	Bank of America, N.A.
	 	 	$	110,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	KeyBank National Association
	 	 	$	75,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	National City Bank
	 	 	$	75,000,000	 
	 		
	Wachovia Bank National Association
	 	 	$	60,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	U.S. Bank National Association
	 	 	$	50,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Fifth Third Bank
	 	 	$	50,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company
	 	 	$	50,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	The Huntington National Bank
	 	 	$	50,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Charter One Bank, N.A.
	 	 	$	40,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Bank of Montreal
	 	 	$	35,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Bank of New York
	 	 	$	35,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Calyon New York Branch
	 	 	$	35,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Comerica Bank
	 	 	$	30,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	First Merit Bank
	 	 	$	25,000,000	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	TOTAL
	 	 	$	720,000,000	 








 




			
	1	 	Revised as of December 20, 2007
STATE of Louisiana v. Catina CURLEY

NO. 2016-KP-1708

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 23, 2018

Granted. See Order Attached.

Attachment

**SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA**

**No. 2016-KP-1708**

**STATE OF LOUISIANA**

**VERSUS**

**CATINA CURLEY**

On Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Criminal District Court, Parish of Orleans, No. 491-907, Division K; Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2016-K-0604.

And, whereas, the Court has this date, pursuant to Article 5, Section 5, of the Constitution of Louisiana, made and issued the following order, to wit-"It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the District Court and the Court of Appeal send up the record in Duplicate of the case; and that counsel for all parties be notified."

Now, therefore, the said District Court and the Court of Appeal is hereby commanded, in the name of the State of Louisiana and of this Honorable Court, to send up forthwith to this Court, in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 1, at the City of New Orleans, the record in duplicate of the above-entitled case.

Witness the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana, on this 23RD day of February, in the year of our Lord, Two Thousand-Seventeen.

*/s/*

John Tarlton Olivier

Clerk of Court

*/s/*

Deputy Clerk of Court
Building Technologies Program Home | EERE Home | U.S. Department of Energy Webmaster | Web Site Policies | Security & Privacy | USA.gov Content Last Updated: 07/16/2010 Search Help More Search Options Printable Version 

## Refrigerator, Refrigerat or-Freezer, and Freezer Materials in Support of Stakeholder Negotiations This page presents analytical results and tools provided to key stakeholders whom are negotiating potential energy conser vation standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers and freezers. Some of the following documents are available as Adobe Acrobat PDFs. Download Adobe Reader 

### Analytical Results z Analytical Results provided on April 15, 2010 ( PDF 232 KB ) z Analytical Results provided on May 4, 2010 ( PDF 235 KB ) z Analytical Results provided on May 5, 2010 ( PDF 36 KB ) z Analytical Results provided on May 20, 2010 ( PDF 348 KB ) 

### Analytical Tools Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Spreadsheets

z Product Class 3 ( Excel 5.4 MB ) z Product Class 5 ( Excel 5.4 MB ) z Product Class 7 ( Excel 5.1 MB ) z Product Class 9 ( Excel 4.5 MB ) z Product Class 10 ( Excel 4.5 MB ) z Product Class 11 ( Excel 3.4 MB ) z Product Class 18 ( Excel 3.4 MB ) National Impact Analysis Spreadsheet

z Compact Refrigerators ( Excel 1.2 MB ) z Compact Refrigerator-Freezers ( Excel 1.9 MB ) z Freezers ( Excel 1.8 MB ) z Freezers, UAF=1 ( Excel 1.8 MB ) z Refrigerator-Freezers ( Excel 3.7 MB ) z Refrigerator-Freezers, UAF=1 ( Excel 3.6 MB ) 

### Contact Information Subid Wagley Project Manager 202-287-1414

Printable Version EERE Information Center Programs and Offices 

# Page 1 of 1 Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards: Refrigerator, Refrigerato r -Freezer, an ...

7/30/2010 htt p ://www1.eere.ener gy . g ov/buildin g s/a pp liance

_ standards/residential/refri g erators

_ su pp ...
Docket Number FAA-2012-0144

 Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed? 

Organization Person Contacted Date Response 

National Business Aircraft Association Eli Cotti 7/1/11

Regional Airline Association Connie

Arnold

7/1/11

Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association Robert Hackman 7/1/11

ATA Joe White 7/1/11