alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Allan L. MURRHEE, Appellant, v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION and Nancy L. Latham, Appellees.

Case No. 2D16-5144

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 3, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
### ^or-OS.T-l«l<^B-(^<l1

-



# Theodor e Roosevel t fnxr- ^ - a ; r n 

## REGIONA L AIRPOR T > g§ ^ 1112 0 42n d St . SW , Suit e A • Dickinson , N D 5860 1 Q § Phone : 701-483-1062'Fax : 701-483-107 2 -cro o dicklnsonairport@ndsupernet.co m • www.dickinsonairport.co m " " October 19,201 0 Mr . Denni s Devan y Essential Ai r

Servic e Divisio n X-5 3 Offic e o f Aviatio n Analysi s W86-30 8 Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 1200 Ne w Jerse y Ave . S.E . Washingto n D.C . 2059 0 Dea r Mr . Devany , Th e Dickinso n Municipal Airpor t Authorit y ha s reviewe dth e proposa l submitte db y Grea t Lake s Airlin e an dstrongl y urge s th e DO T t o selec t Grea t Lake s Airlines ' proposal t o provid e thre e roun dtrip s wit h tw o standalon e roundtrip s betwee n Dickinso n an d Denver . We feel th e followin g informatio n provide s justificatio n t o awardth e bi dt o Grea t Lake s Airlines :

• Grea t Lake s ha s bee n servin g southwes t N D fo r th e las t seventee n year s an dha s a stron g commitmen t

t o Dickinson . • Grea t Lake s an dth e communit

y hav e develope dagoo dworkin g relationship . • Th e curren t

stan dalon e roundtrip , whic h starte di n Augus t 2010 , ha s bee n extremel y successful , a s evidence db y a30 % increas e i n passenge r boarding s i n September

2010 . • Dickinso n ha s ahig h leve l o f confidenc e that

Grea t Lake s wil l fulfill th e requirement s o f

th e EA S contract . • Grea t Lake s ha s cod e sharin g agreement s wit h Frontier an dUnited , bot

h o f whic h us e Denver

a s amajor

hub . • Grea t Lake s ha s man y additional baggag e agreement s wit h other airline s i n Denver . Thi s allow s eas e t o traveler s wh o are no t connectin g wit

h Unite do r Frontier . • Grea t Lakes ' flight

schedul e coordinate s ver

y wel l wit h th e flight

bank s ou t o f Denver . Great LakeyfeiSjfifeo dreputatio n fo r reliabl e service . i^t^^^^ M competitiv e fare s i n an dou t o f Dickinson . slfl n establishe dEA S carrie r throughou t

th e country . mJp» 'Mos t importantl y Great

Lake s ha s agreat

safet y record . I n closing , airlin e servic e t o southwes t N D i s acritica l componen t fo r th e ability o f

th e commimit y t o servic e th e curren t

growt h i n energ y secto r

business . And , a s ha s bee n in th e past , goo dai r

servic e i s vital t o th e overal l economi c healt h an dgrowt

h o f th e region . W e strongl y urg e th e DO T t o awardth e bi dt o Grea t Lake s becaus e w e ar e confident th e managemen t

an dorganizatio n ha s th e bes t ability t o fiilfill th e term s o f th e EA S contract . tacerel 

### ;relv f i o n Frantsvog , Chairman ickinso n Municipa l Airpor t Authority Cc . Larr

y Taborsky , Director,Nort h Dakot aStat e Aeronautic s Denni s W . Johnson , Mayor , City o f Dickinso n Governo r Joh n Hoeve n Senato r Ken t Conra d Senato r Byro n Dorgan Representativ e Earl Pomero y
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

July 18, 2011

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Meeting with GM on May 4, 2011

FROM: Don Kopinski

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

This memorandum documents a meeting held on May 4, 2011 between GM and EPA staff. The 

following people attended:

GM: Barbara Kiss, Steve Fornetti

EPA: Angela Cullen, Chuck Moulis, Byron Bunker, Cle Jackson, Don Kopinski

The discussion focused on incomplete vehicles and loose engines.
Exhibit
32.1




CTM MEDIA
HOLDINGS, INC.




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 CTM Media Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for fiscal 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the “Report”), I, Marc E. Knoller, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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
      Company.




Date:
October 29, 2009


/s/
      Marc E. KnollerMarc
      E. KnollerChief
      Executive Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to CTM Media Holdings, Inc. and
will be retained by CTM Media Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-10742

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ERIC BRYANT,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:95-CR-005-A

- - - - - - - - - -

 April 26, 1996

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Eric Bryant argues that his right to due process was

violated by the district court’s refusal to grant his motion for

a downward departure. Because we lack jurisdiction to review the

district court’s exercise of its discretion in denying the motion

for a downward departure, unless the court’s refusal was the

result of a violation of law or a misapplication of the

Sentencing Guidelines, the appeal is DISMISSED. United States v.

DiMarco, 46 F.3d 476, 477 (5th Cir. 1995). 
DISMISSED.
Alvin Neal PORTER, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-4833

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed December 27, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Petitioner

v.

STEVEN LEONARD VERBECK,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 406 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 4 th day of January, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED . The issue, as stated by petitioner is:

Whether the Superior Court erred in holding for DUI sentencing purposes that the Defendant’s conviction was a first offense in ten years as opposed to a second offense in ten years based upon the defective holding in Commonwealth v.

Chichkin , 232 A.3d 959 (Pa. Super. 2020) that acceptance of ARD could not be treated as a prior conviction?

Justice Brobson did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
|                      |   | State or Other Jurisdiction of |   |
|---------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Subsidiary                |   | Incorporation or Organization            |   |
|                      |   |                                               |   |
| Telesat      Satellite LP |   | Delaware                                           |   |
|                      |   |                                               |   |

|                      |   | State or Other Jurisdiction of |   |
|---------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Subsidiary                |   | Incorporation or Organization            |   |
|                      |   |                                               |   |
| Telesat      Interco Inc. |   | Canada                                             |   |
|                      |   |                                               |   |
| Telesat      Canada       |   | Canada                                             |   |
|                      |   |                                               |   |

----
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consentof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

IroncladPerformance Wear Corporation

Farmers Branch,Texas

We herebyconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements Form S-8 (Nos. 333-197355, 333-189258, 333-139210, 333-145855and 333-176326) of Ironclad Performance Wear Corporation of our report dated March 16, 2015, relating to the consolidated financialstatements, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

/s/BDO USA, LLP

Dallas,Texas 

March16, 2015
The Honorable Russell G. Clark, United States District Judge for the Western 1

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-1053

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Missouri.

Keith J. Gatlin, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: December 2, 1996

 Filed: June 25, 1997 

___________

Before BEAM, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Keith Gatlin pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute cocaine and cocaine base

(crack), in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, and conspiring to launder

money, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). The district court sentenced Gatlin to 121 1

months imprisonment and five years supervised release, and he appeals. Counsel filed
-2-

a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Gatlin filed a pro se

supplemental brief with our permission. We affirm.

We reject Gatlin's challenge to the district court's drug-quantity calculation.

Absent plain error, Gatlin cannot now challenge this calculation because he failed to

object to the quantity determination in the presentence report (PSR) either before or at

sentencing. See United States v. Karam, 37 F.3d 1280, 1285 (8th Cir. 1994), cert.

denied, 115 S. Ct. 1113 (1995). We find no plain error in the district court's drugquantity determination based upon the factual statements in the PSR. See United States

v. Hill, 91 F.3d 1064, 1072 (8th Cir. 1996) (defining plain error); United States v.

LaRoche, 83 F.3d 958, 959 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (district court entitled to

accept as true factual statements in PSR to which defendant does not object).

We requested Gatlin's counsel to submit a supplemental brief in this case

addressing whether Gatlin's prior Eastern District of Missouri conviction barred a part

of the instant prosecution based on double jeopardy. Having carefully reviewed the

record, counsel's supplemental brief, and a second pro se brief submitted by Gatlin, we

now conclude the indictment does not raise double jeopardy concerns on its face, and

thus a double-jeopardy claim lacks merit. See United States v. Vaughan, 13 F.3d 1186,

1188 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1094 (1994).

Having reviewed the record, we find no other nonfrivolous issues. See Penson

v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). Accordingly, we affirm. 

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1168 

To amend title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide program 

eligibility for distance education programs offered by foreign institutions 

of higher education. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 17, 2023 

Mr. BRAUN (for himself and Mr. KAINE) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 

to provide program eligibility for distance education programs offered by foreign institutions of higher education. 

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 ‘‘Providing Distance 

5 Education for Foreign Institutions Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 1168 IS

1 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY OF DISTANCE EDUCATION PROGRAMS 

2 OFFERED BY FOREIGN INSTITUTIONS OF 

3 HIGHER EDUCATION. 

4 Section 481(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 

5 (20 U.S.C. 1088(b)) is amended— 

6 (1) by redesignating paragraph (4) as para7 graph (5); and 

8 (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the fol9 lowing: 

10 ‘‘(4)(A) An otherwise eligible program that is offered 

11 by a foreign institution and is offered in part through dis12 tance education is eligible for the purposes of this title 

13 if— 

14 ‘‘(i) not more than 12.5 percent of such pro15 gram consists of courses offered principally through 

16 distance education; 

17 ‘‘(ii) the foreign institution has been evaluated 

18 and determined by an outside oversight entity, such 

19 as an accrediting agency or association or govern20 ment entity, to have the capability to effectively de21 liver distance education programs; and 

22 ‘‘(iii) the students receiving aid under this title 

23 are physically present in the country where the for24 eign institution is located during the distance edu25 cation instruction. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 1168 IS

1 ‘‘(B) In calculating the percentage of a program of2 fered through distance education for purposes of clause 

3 (i) of subparagraph (A), any course that is part of such 

4 a program that requires a student’s regular in-person at5 tendance for more than 50 percent of the instruction, but 

6 also includes one or more distance education components 

7 as part of the course, shall not be considered to be offered 

8 principally through distance education.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Brian FITZPATRICK and Lai Fong Fitzpatrick, Appellants, v. Kelly M. MEREDITH, D.C., et al., Appellees.

No. 4D17-2262

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

January 18, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Stephen John COLLINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-4780

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
STATE of Louisiana v. Roman FORD

NO. 2017-KO-0936

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 6, 2018

Denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research Committee.

The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended for review, discussion, and evaluation of individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, including consideration of personnel qualifications and performance, and the competence of individual investors, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research Committee.                    

*Date:*                         February 15-16, 2018.                    

*Time:*                         8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Ritz Carlton Hotel, 1150 22nd Street NW, Washington, DC 20037.                    

*Contact Person:*                         James T. Snyder, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities/Room 3G31B, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9834, Bethesda, MD 20892-9834, (240) 669-5060,                         *james.snyder@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: January 18, 2018.

Natasha M. Copeland,

 Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2018-01190 Filed 1-23-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Paige C. TARVER and Michael A. Crow, Appellants, v. BRICKELL KEY ONE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1577

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 24, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841*et seq.*) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.                

The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than February 14, 2018.

*A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas*                     (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:                

                    1.                     *Independent Bank Group, Inc., McKinney, Texas;*                     to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Integrity Bancshares, Inc., and indirectly acquire shares of Integrity Bank, SSB, both of Houston, Texas.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 16, 2018.

Ann E. Misback,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2018-00948 Filed 1-19-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE P
----

Action brought on 28 January 2004 by Eurodrive Services and Distribution N.V. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM)

(Case T-31/04)

(2004/C 190/26)

Language of the case: Spanish

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 28 January 2004 by Eurodrive Services and Distribution N.V., established in Amsterdam (Netherlands), represented by E. Armijo Chávarri and A. Castán Pérez-Gómez, letrados en ejercicio.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
financial  statements included in the Form 10-Q of American Safety Razor Company
for the  quarter  ended June 30,  2000,  and is  qualified  in its  entirety  by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000750339
<NAME>                        American Safety Razor Company
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollar

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         3,776
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  47,280
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    60,819
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               121,015
<PP&E>                                         104,661
<DEPRECIATION>                                 14,878
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 400,166
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          47,869
<BONDS>                                        180,126
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       121
<OTHER-SE>                                     119,937
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   400,166
<SALES>                                        157,130
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               157,130
<CGS>                                          105,220
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  105,220
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             9,553
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2,987
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,395
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,592
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,592
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.13



</TABLE>