alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 59 (Monday, March 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 14133]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-7059]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special 
Emphasis Panel (SEP): CDC Grants for Public Health Research 
Dissertation, Panel G, Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) PAR07-231

    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting.

    Time and Date: 12 p.m.--3 p.m., May 12, 2009 (Closed).
    Place: Teleconference.
    Status: The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance 
with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c) (4) and (6), Title 5 
U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis 
and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.
    Matters to be Discussed: The meeting will include the review, 
discussion, and evaluation of applications received in response to 
``CDC Grants for Public Health Research Dissertation, Panel G, FOA 
PAR07-231.''
    For Further Information Contact: Christine J. Morrison, PhD, 
Scientific Review Officer, Office of the Director, Office of the 
Chief Science Officer, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., Mailstop D72, 
Atlanta, GA 30333, Telephone: (404) 639-3098.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining 
to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry.

    Dated: March 23, 2009.
Elaine L. Baker,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. E9-7059 Filed 3-27-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00193

- CV

Noordin Poonjani, Showket

Panjwani, and 1st Nations Fastop

Marketing, Inc.

v.

Zainab Kamaluddin, as the Trustee

of The Abdulhameed and Zainab

Kamaluddin Family Trust §

§

§

§ From the 211th District Court

of Denton County (2013

- 30033

- 211)

June 4, 2015

Opinion by Chief Justice Livingston



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and ho lds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that appellants Noordin Poonjani, Showket Panjwani,

and 1st Nations Fastop Marketing, Inc. shall pay all of t he costs of this appeal, for

which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Terrie Livingston

C hief Justice Terrie Livingston
P.1 

OAR Box 1830 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

233) IV-C-194 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 11/13/2008 9:00:23 AM Sheet 233 of 236 
P.2 

y

08* 

A-87-1A 

^ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

AUeioOB OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

Mr. Brian O'Neill 

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety 

1005 North Glebe Road f.;.'f. r, - •>., 

Arlington ' ^ v , VA 22201

 /ivA3

 <•

 4 

Dear Mr. O'Neill: 

This is in response to your letter of February 23, 1993 to 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Carol M. 

Browner concerning onboard refueling vapor recovery systems (ORVR). 

We apologize for the delay in responding to your concerns. 

Since February, a number of events have transpired regarding 

ORVR. The government did not seek a rehearing of the court ruling, 

and has now entered into a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs 

to have the final rule signed by January 22, 1994. On May 27, 

1993, EPA published a Federal Register notice regarding the ORVR 

requirement and most recently a public hearing was held July 22, 

1993. We appreciate the participation of the Insurance Institute 

for Highway Safety, as presented by Stephen L. Oesch. 

We understand your concerns about the safety of ORVR systems. 

EPA will continue to work with DOT to assess the safety concerns 

that arise.in the development of an ORVR final rule. At the. public 

hearing EPA and the auto manufacturers discussed a number of test 

procedure changes which, if implemented, the manufacturers agreed 

would" allow them to use ORVR system designs which ease their 

earlier safety concerns. The manufacturers stated that, with this 

new test procedure approach, ORVR systems could be integrated with 

enhanced evaporative emission control systems, thus allowing the 

use of the same canister and purge strategy. In addition, liquid 

fillneck seal approaches would be possible. In that regard, I ask 

that as you prepare your written comments on the May 27, 1993 

Federal Register notice, you reassess your concerns about the 

safety of ORVR systems. All of these hardware changes would 

simplify ORVR designs. As you may know, the comment period on this 

rule closes August 22, 1993. 

Thank you again for your interest in this rulemaking. Your 

letter will be placed in the public docket. 

Chester/0"L/France, Director 

Regulation Development and Support Division
E.W., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1205

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 20, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Randy l. ROUNDTREE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-1527

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 31, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
----

| Date:  | March                14, 2007 |   |                                       |
|--------|-------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|   |                          | By:    | /s/                John W. Alvey           |
|   |                          |   | John                W. Alvey               |
|   |                          |   | Treasurer                and               |
|   |                          |   | Principal                Financial Officer |
|   |                          |   | Maxus                Realty Trust, Inc.    |
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 Synthetech, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), I, M. Sreenivasan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|1. | The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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 Company.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





| | /s/ M. SreenivasanM. SreenivasanPresident & Chief Executive OfficerAugust 10, 2006
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------





























32
Horace Monroe WOOD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D16-928

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 28, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Victor Holder, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Virginia Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

OSTERHAUS, J.

*925Horace Wood appeals his convictions for sexual battery on a child 12 years of age or younger and lewd or lascivious molestation on a child 12 years of age or younger. He raises six issues on appeal, one of which we find has merit and requires reversal. We otherwise affirm.

At trial, part of the State's evidence was the testimony of two other children, who testified that Mr. Wood had also sexually abused them. Mr. Wood asserted that the evidence was inadmissible, but after holding a pre-trial hearing, the court allowed the State to present the testimony.

In cases of child molestation, "evidence of the defendant's commission of other crimes, wrongs, or acts of child molestation is admissible, and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant." § 90.404(2)(b)(1), Fla. Stat.; *see also**Williams v. State* , 110 So.2d 654 (Fla. 1959). Because of the possible danger of unfair prejudice, the "trial court's gatekeeping function is critical. In every case, the trial court must conduct the weighing required by section 90.403." *McLean v. State* , 934 So.2d 1248, 1261 (Fla. 2006). However, "before even considering whether to allow evidence of prior acts to be presented to the jury, the trial court must find that the prior acts were proved by clear and convincing evidence." *Id.* at 1262 ; *Harrelson v. State* , 146 So.3d 171, 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).

Here, while the trial court properly performed the balancing required by § 90.403 and *McLean* , it failed to make the required finding that the collateral acts were proved by clear and convincing evidence. This defect requires us to reverse. *Harrelson* , 146 So.3d at 174 (reversing the judgment and sentence where the trial court failed to make the requisite finding that the collateral acts were proved, and declining to make such finding in the first instance). As in *Harrelson* , however, "we do not believe this conclusion mandates a new trial because the trial court *did* perform the section 90.403 'gatekeeping' analysis required under *McLean* ." *Id.*

Accordingly, we reverse Mr. Wood's conviction with directions that the trial court conduct the required clear and convincing inquiry. If the State cannot prove the collateral crimes by clear and convincing evidence, then the trial court shall hold a new trial excluding the evidence of the collateral crime or crimes that were not proved. *Id.*

REVERSED and REMANDED .

Lewis and Makar, JJ., concur.
#### Jacob Louis WASHINGTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeff KILLIAN; Warren Rahn, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 04-1001.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

May 18, 2004.

Jacob Louis Washington, Pueblo, CO, pro se.

Before EBEL, MURPHY, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

*879ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

McCONNELL, Circuit Judge.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This case is therefore submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff Jacob Louis Washington, a state prisoner in Colorado, is suing his parole officers, Jeff Killian and Warren Rahn, for money damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for an alleged unconstitutional revocation of his parole. The gravamen of his claim is that he was “not given a proper hearing at the parole board.” He claims that his parole was revoked because he was arrested on parole, but that the charges against him were subsequently dismissed.

As the district court correctly held, this suit is precluded by the Supreme Court’s decision in *Heck v. Humphrey,*512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). In *Heck,*the Court held that a suit by a prisoner for money damages under § 1983, which would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence, is precluded unless or until the underlying conviction or sentence has been reversed, expunged, or otherwise held invalid. *Id.*at 486-87. Because Mr. Washington’s claim that his parole revocation was unconstitutional would necessarily imply the invalidity of his sentence, this case falls within the prohibition in *Heck.*As we have previously noted, the rule in *Heck*applies to “proceedings that call into question the fact or duration of parole or probation.” *Crow v. Penry,*102 F.3d 1086, 1087 (10th Cir.1996) (per curiam) (citation omitted). Mr. Washington does not allege, and nothing in the record indicates, that his parole revocation has been invalidated. A suit for money damages is not the proper vehicle for challenging the validity of his parole revocation.

The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado is AFFIRMED.

Appellant’s motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee is GRANTED. He is reminded that he is obligated to begin making partial payments toward the filing fee and to continue making partial payments until the entire fee has been paid.

*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1010 

To authorize the honorary promotion of Master Sergeant Harold B. Pharis, 

United States Army (retired), to Sergeant Major. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 28, 2023 

Mr. BRAUN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To authorize the honorary promotion of Master Sergeant 

Harold B. Pharis, United States Army (retired), to Sergeant Major. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION FOR HONORARY PROMOTION 

4 OF MASTER SERGEANT HAROLD B. PHARIS, 

5 UNITED STATES ARMY (RETIRED), TO SER6 GEANT MAJOR. 

7 (a) HONORARY PROMOTION.—The honorary pro8 motion of Master Sergeant Harold B. Pharis, United 

9 States Army (retired), to the grade of Sergeant Major is 

10 hereby authorized. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1010 IS

1 (b) ADDITIONAL BENEFITS NOT TO ACCRUE.—The 

2 honorary promotion of Harold B. Pharis pursuant to sub3 section (a) shall not affect the retired pay or other benefits 

4 from the United States to which Harold B. Pharis is enti5 tled based upon his military service or affect any benefits 

6 to which any other person may become entitled based on 

7 his military service. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Marshall Runae PORTER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-3992

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

November 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Willis Alphonso REDDICK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D17-1041

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 29, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit      32.1**

**SECTION      906 CERTIFICATION**

| 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. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                May 11, 2007 | /s/                Gerald G. Barton                 |
|-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                              | Gerald                G. Barton                     |
|                              | Chairman                and Chief Executive Officer |
|                              | Landmark                Land Company, Inc.          |
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1046 

To amend title 49, United States Code, with respect to apportionments 

for small airports under the Airport Improvement Program, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BARRASSO introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, with respect to 

apportionments for small airports under the Airport Improvement Program, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Airport Regula5 tion Relief Act of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. APPORTIONMENTS. 

7 Section 47114(c)(1) of title 49, United States Code, 

8 is amended by adding at the end the following: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 1046 IS

1 ‘‘(K) SPECIAL RULE FOR FISCAL YEARS

2 2024 THROUGH 2026.—Notwithstanding sub3 paragraph (A), the Secretary shall apportion to 

4 the sponsor of an airport under that subpara5 graph, for each of fiscal years 2024, 2025, and 

6 2026, an amount based on the number of pas7 senger boardings at the airport during calendar 

8 year 2019, 2020, or 2021, whichever had the 

9 highest number of passenger boardings, if the 

10 airport had— 

11 ‘‘(i) fewer than 10,000 passenger 

12 boardings during the calendar year used to 

13 calculate the apportionment for fiscal year 

14 2024, 2025, or 2026, as applicable, under 

15 subparagraph (A); and 

16 ‘‘(ii) 10,000 or more passenger 

17 boardings during calendar year 2019.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Michael A. MITCHELL, Appellant, v. SUWANNEE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Appellee.

No. 1D16-4903

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 5, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jesus PATINO-HERNANDEZ, aka Jesus Patina-Hernandez, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-10521.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 10, 2004.*

Decided May 18, 2004.

*207Christina M. Cabanillas, Julia Soto, USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Evo A. DeConcini Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Eugene Marquez, Eugene Marquez, P.L.C., Tempe, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Jesus Patino-Hernandez appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 51-month sentence for one count of unlawful reentry into the United States by a previously deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for PatinoHernandez has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. PatinoHernandez has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no grounds for relief. We therefore GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
IN RE: Appeal of the DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 13-PDB-122

NO. 2018-OB-0007

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 23, 2018

Leave to appeal denied.
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 Annual Report of MultiPlayer Online Dragon Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the “report”), I, Yuan Kun Deng, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated this 9th day of July, 2010.








YUAN KUN DENGYuan Kun DengChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Larry MCDOUGAL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1135

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 29, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Davel Mario ROSS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-2098

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Dallas SEYMOUR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-3815

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[January 11, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 811 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 811

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      October 25, 2023.
    Resolved, That the Clerk be instructed to inform the President of the United 
States that the House of Representatives has elected Mike Johnson, a 
Representative from the State of Louisiana, Speaker of the House of 
Representatives.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Jonathan Arn BRYANT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D16-772

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 11, 2018 Rehearing Denied March 1, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **0 -**  **2 19**  **7**

TATYANA A. BABAKAEVA , P laintiff

– Appell ant ,

v. CHRISTIE M. WILSON; WILSON & WILSON, P.C. , Defen d a nt s – Appell ee s .

Appeal from the United States District Co urt for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Newport News
. Raymond A. Jackson , District Judge. ( 4 : 0 9

- c v - 0 00 5 8

- R AJ

- FBS )

Submitted : April 29, 2011 Decided: May 17, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirm ed by unpublished pe r curiam opinion

.
Tatyana A. Babakaeva, Appellant Pro Se
. James Harrell Shoemaker, Jr., PATTEN, WORNOM, HATTEN & DIAMONSTEIN, LC, Newport News , Virginia, for Appellee s .
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Taty ana A. Babakaeva appeals the district court ’s order granting summary judgment to Defendants *

AFFIRMED in this action raising se veral claims in connection with Defendants’ representation of Plaintiff in a divorce proceeding . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Babakaeva v. Wilson , No. 4:09

- cv - 00058

- RAJ

- FBS (E.D. Va. Sept. 23, 2010) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presen ted in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

* Babakaeva named as Defendants Paul H. Wilson and Wilson & Wilson, P.C. Paul Wilson died after entry of the district court’s final order. His personal repr esentative, Christie M. Wilson, was substituted as a party to this appeal.