alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4526-4527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01572]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and 
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B 
(Formerly Subpart Q) During the Week Ending December 7, 2013

    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience 
and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart 
B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural 
Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et. seq.). The due date for Answers, 
Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below 
for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the 
application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the 
adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate 
cases a final order without further proceedings.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2013-0204.
    Date Filed: December 2, 2013.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify 
Scope: December 23, 2013.
    Description: Application of Norwegian Air International Limited 
(``Norwegian International'') requesting exemption authority and a 
foreign air carrier permit to enable it to conduct foreign scheduled 
and charter air transportation of persons, property and mail to the 
full extent permitted under the open skies U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air 
Transport Agreement; Norwegian International requests authority to 
engage in: (a) Foreign scheduled and charter air transportation of 
persons, property and mail from any point or points behind any Member 
State(s) of the European Union, via any point or points in any Member 
State and via intermediate points, to any point(s) in the United States 
and beyond; (b) foreign scheduled and charter air transportation of 
persons, property, and mail between any point or points in the United 
States and any point or points in any member of the European Common 
Aviation Area; (c) foreign scheduled and charter air transportation of 
persons

[[Page 4527]]

property and mail between any point or points in Norway, via 
intermediate points, and any point or points in the United States; (d) 
foreign scheduled and charter cargo air transportation between any 
point or points in the United States and any other point or points; (e) 
other charters pursuant to the prior approval requirements; and (f) 
scheduled and charter transportation consistent with any future, 
additional rights that may be granted to European Union carriers under 
the U.S.-E.U. Open Skies Agreement.

Barbara J. Hairston,
Supervisory Dockets Officer, Docket Operations, Federal Register 
Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2014-01572 Filed 1-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
```
STATE of Louisiana v. Dwayne LEBLANC

No. 2016-KP-1485

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 20, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Relator's application was not timely filed in the district court, and he fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189. In addition, relator's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).

*919Finally, relator fails to show he is factually innocent of the crimes under the standard of *State v. Conway* , 01-2808 (La. 4/12/02), 816 So.2d 290.

Relator has now fully litigated two applications for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.

Hughes, J. would grant the writ in part.

GENOVESE, J., would grant in part and remand only to assess the Brady claim.
ANNUAL SERVICING CERTIFICATION

In connection with the loans serviced by FT Mortgage Companies during the fiscal
year December 31, 1999,  we confirm the  following to be materially  correct and
accurate to the best of our knowledge, information and belief:

1) Real estate taxes, special assessments and any charges that may become a lien
   upon the  property  and which  come due in the last  calendar  year have been
   paid.  This also  includes  the  verification  with  taxing  authorities  for
   non-escrowed mortgages.

2) FHA insurance premiums or private mortgage insurance premiums, if applicable,
   have been paid and are in full force and effect.

3) Properties are adequately insured and your interest, as Mortgagee is properly
   provided  for in the mortgage  clause.  This  includes  both flood and hazard
   insurance.

4) For those  loans  being  escrowed  for the  payment  of taxes and  insurance,
   sufficient  amounts  are being  collected  monthly to provide  for payment of
   future items.

5) Property  inspections have been completed  according to the provisions of our
   servicing agreement, if applicable.

6) All other provisions of the servicing agreement have been adhered to.

7) To the extent there exist any  exceptions to the foregoing that are deemed to
   be  material  in  nature,  such  exception(s)  will be  recited in an Exhibit
   attached  hereto and accompanied by an explanation  thereof.  In the event no
   Exhibit is attached  hereto,  it is to be presumed  that no  exceptions  of a
   material nature to the foregoing exist.


By: Sheryl Court
(Signature)
Sheryl Court
(Printed name)
Vice President
(Title)
3/23/00
August 18 , 2015



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

APARTMENT EXPRESS LL C , Appellant

NO. 14

- 15

- 00532

- CV V.

SOUTHCHASE NORTH APA RTMENTS

, Appellee

________________________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on June 10, 2015. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant, Apartment Express LLC.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Unassociated Document





 












Exhibit 4.8.79 - Document List - ELECTRIC CATALOGUE 3




 










  







	  	  	
Drawing List

	
Page 3

	
Total 3


	
Building


Owner

	
Shenyang Sunshine Pharmaceutical


Company Limited

	
Design No.

	  	
Project No.

	  
	
Project Title

	  	
Sub-project Title

	  	
Design Item

	
Electric


	
Drawing No.

	
Drawing Title

	
Size

	
Remark


	
D558-E-331

	
AUTOMATIC CONTROLWIRING DIAGRAM (PLCP-2) 2

	
A1

	  
	
D558-E-332

	
AUTOMATIC CONTROLWIRING DIAGRAM (PLCP-3) 3

	
A1

	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  
	
Project Principal

	  	
Checked by

	  	
Authorized by

	  	
Date

	
2009.05.15
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE 

STATE OF OREGON

ELIZABETH A. EARLS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) SC S51005

)

HARDY MYERS, Attorney General, )

State of Oregon, ) *AMENDED

) ORDER CERTIFYING

Respondent. ) BALLOT TITLE

Upon consideration by the court.

Petitioner’s arguments that the Attorney General’s certified ballot title for Initiative

Petition 97 (2004) does not comply substantially with ORS 250.035(2) are not well taken.

The court certifies to the Secretary of State the Attorney General’s certified ballot

title for the proposed measure.

Dated this 4th day of February 2004.

 

WALLACE P. CARSON, JR.

CHIEF JUSTICE

c: Bruce A. Bishop

Rolf C. Moan

Publications, Oregon Judicial Department

Hon. Bill Bradbury, Oregon Secretary of State

 DESIGNATION OF PREVAILING PARTY AND AWARD OF COSTS 

 Prevailing party: Respondent

 [XX] No costs allowed.

order.wpd
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 78 (Friday, April 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18708-18709]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9259]


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

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notices

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

    Note:  There will be a continuation of the open meeting of 
Thursday, April 16, 2009, on Tuesday, April 21, 2009, at 10 a.m.


Item to be Discussed: Draft Advisory Opinion 2009-03: 
IntercontinentalExchange, Inc., by Andrew J. Surdykowski, Esquire.

Date AND Time: Thursday, April 23, 2009, at 10 a.m.

Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

Status: This meeting will be open to the public.

[[Page 18709]]


Items to be Discussed: Correction and Approval of Minutes.
    Draft Advisory Opinion 2009-06: Jim Risch for Lieutenant Governor 
Committee, by David D. Goss, Treasurer.

Management and Administrative Matters. Individuals who plan to attend 
and require special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or 
other reasonable accommodations, should contact Mary Dove, Commission 
Secretary, at (202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the hearing 
date.

Person to Contact for Information: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-9259 Filed 4-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
Exhibit 99.1


                            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 Geotec Thermal Generators, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, W. Richard Lueck, Chief Executive Officer and Accounting
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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


/s/ W. Richard Lueck
   -----------------
W. Richard Lueck
CEO,  and Treasurer
Principal Executive Financial and
Accounting Officer
Santander UK plc
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
Calculated in accordance with IFRS
 Excluding interest on retail deposits
 Year ended December 312009
    
    2008
    
    2007
    
    2006
    
    2005£m
    
    £m
    
    £m
    
    £m
    
    £mProfit on continuing operations before tax
    
    
    1,690
    
    
    
    1,094
    
    
    
    864
    
    
    
    428
    
    
    
    362Fixed charges: interest expense (B)(1)
    
    
    1,650
    
    
    
    2,988
    
    
    
    2,639
    
    
    
    1,896
    
    
    
    1,688Earnings before taxes and fixed charges (A)
    
    
    3,340
    
    
    
    4,082
    
    
    
    3,503
    
    
    
    2,324
    
    
    
    2,050Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (A/B)
    
    
    202.42
    
    
    
    136.61
    
    
    
    132.74
    
    
    
    122.57
    
    
    
    121.45
 Including interest on retail deposits
 Year ended December 312009
    
    2008
    
    2007
    
    2006
    
    2005£m
    
    £m
    
    £m
    
    £m
    
    £mProfit on continuing operations before tax
    
    
    1,690
    
    
    
    1,094
    
    
    
    864
    
    
    
    428
    
    
    
    362Fixed charges: interest expense (B)(1)
    
    
    3,906
    
    
    
    6,143
    
    
    
    5,544
    
    
    
    4,414
    
    
    
    4,250Earnings before taxes and fixed charges (A)
    
    
    5,596
    
    
    
    7,237
    
    
    
    6,408
    
    
    
    4,842
    
    
    
    4,612Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (A/B)
    
    
    143.27
    
    
    
    117.81
    
    
    
    115.58
    
    
    
    109.70
    
    
    
    108.52
   (1)
    
    Includes the amortisation of discounts and premiums on debt securities in issue.
Douglas M. BAGGE, Petitioner, v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.

Case No. 2D17-579

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

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 the Treasury

###### Fiscal Service

# AGENCY:

Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This is Supplement No. 13 to the Treasury Department Circular 570, 2008 Revision, published July 1, 2008, at 73 FR 37644.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874-6850.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Continental Heritage Insurance Company, Columbus, Ohio (NAIC 39551), has redomesticated from the state of Ohio to the state of Florida, effective December 22, 2008.

Federal bond-approving officers should annotate their reference copies of the Treasury Department Circular 570 (“Circular”), 2008 revision, to reflect this change.

                    The Circular may be viewed and downloaded through the Internet at                     *http://www.fms.treas.gov/​c570*.                

Questions concerning this notice may be directed to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service, Funds Management Division, Surety Bond Branch, 3700 East-West Highway, Room 6F01, Hyattsville, MD 20782.

Dated: April 9, 2009.

Vivian L. Cooper,

Director, Financial Accounting and Services Division.

[FR Doc. E9-9105 Filed 4-21-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T R I C A R D O V E L A - L U Q U E , a . k. a . R i c a r do V el a L uq ue, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 10- 72032 A ge nc yN o. A 094- 811- 095 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d A ugus t8, 2012 ** B efo re: A L A R C Ó N , B E R Z O N , an dIK U T A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. R i c a r do V e l a - L uque , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of P e ru, pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of

the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l fr om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng hi s appl i c a t i on f orr e l i e f unde rthe 

# FI LED

AU G 13 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 72032 2 C on vent i on A gai nstT orture ( “ C A T ”) . W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e rev i ew fo r su b st an t i al ev i d en ce th e ag en cy’ s factu al fi n d i n g s, Si laya v. Mukasey , 524 F . 3d 1066, 1070 ( 9th C i r . 2008) , a nd w e de nythe pe t i t i on f o rr e v i e w. C ontr a ryt o V e l a - L uque ’ s c ont e nt i ons , s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the B IA ’ s deni alof hi s C A T cl ai m because V el a- L uq ue di d n otes t abl i sh i ti s m ore l i ke l ytha n nothe w i l l be t ortur e d byorw i th the c ons e ntora c qui e s c e nc e of the P e ru v ia n g o v e rn m e n t. See Zhengv. H older , 64 4 F . 3d 82 9, 83 5-36 (9th C i r. 20 11 ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
**Exhibit 15.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in RegistrationStatementNo. 333-13146 onForm F-3 of ourreport dated 15 March 2007, relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements of Abbey National plc (which reportexpresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatoryparagraph relating to the nature and effect of differencesbetween International Financial Reporting Standards andaccounting principles generally accepted in the United States ofAmerica), appearing in this Annual Report onForm 20-F of AbbeyNational plc for the year ended 31 December 2006.Deloitte & Touche LLPChartered Accountants and Registered AuditorsLondon, England15 March 2007
U.S. Department of

Transportation

Office of the Secretary

Of Transportation

Mr. Thomas C. Frungillo

Director

Bradford Regional Airport

212 Airport Drive

Lewis Run, PA 16738

Dear Mr. Frungillo:

.. ~,,.T ,(> Ii j I' 0c

;.1 _....... , , "l' ,.j

D!C /j 20J3

'200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.

Washington,DC 20590

Thank you for your letter dated September 26, 2013, regarding Silver Airways' ("Silver") service at

Bradford. In the letter, you reiterated that the Department of Transportation (Department), in the most

recent carrier selection Order for Bradford (2012-9-23), found that Bradford's enplanements per day

were fewer than 10, which could affect Bradford's future eligibility in the EASProgram. You also stated

that the Department expected Bradford and Silver to work together to make sure that Bradford meets

all of the criteria required to remain in the EASProgram. However, you stated Silver has not been a

willing partner to take steps to increase ridership, resulting in a steady decline in traffic. As a result, you

asked the Department to terminate its contract with Silver and requested a right to a waiver to secure

an airline that would work with the community to deliver adequate air service.

In response to your request to terminate their contract, we informally contacted Silver, and the carrier is

not willing to relinquish its contract prematurely. Thus, the Department is not able to terminate Silver's

contract. Regarding the waiver request, the Department is not in a position yet to issue waivers. The

waiver process is still in development and, once finalized, will apply to all communities. As a result, we

are not entertaining waiver applications at this time. The Department is targeting completion of this

process early next year. Please note that the Department's refusal to consider waivers at the present

time will not prejudice future waiver applications once the process is set in motion.

The Department appreciates Bradford's proactive approach and encourages the community to review

the waiver process once it has been communicated to all parties in the coming months.

We will place a copy of this letter in Bradford's docket on www.regulations.gov.

Sincerely,

, 1/ \ . (\ tie {2~J.n~

Deputy Director

'Office of Aviation Analysis
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

ANTHONY D. DAVIS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.  No. 01-1090

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE,

Defendant-Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.

James C. Fox, Senior District Judge.

(CA-99-236-7-F)

Submitted: December 10, 2001

Decided: December 28, 2001

Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Anthony D. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Wenzl Brown, CRANFILL, SUMNER & HARTZOG, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Anthony D. Davis appeals from the district court’s order granting

summary judgment in favor of Appellee, and dismissing his employment discrimination action alleging violation of Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e (West 1994 &

Supp. 2001), on the ground that the summary judgment motion was

unopposed. Our review of the record discloses that this appeal is subject to dismissal as moot. 

Following the filing of a notice of appeal, by counsel, from the

underlying judgment, Davis filed in the district court a pro se Fed. R.

Civ. P. 60(b) motion in which he claimed attorney malpractice in failing to respond to the motion for summary judgment, and the district

court’s entry of an adverse order without consideration of evidence he

could submit. The district court granted the Rule 60(b) motion, and

ordered Davis to request from this court a limited remand of the

action in light of the district court’s grant of the Rule 60(b) motion

and pursuant to Fobian v. Storage Technology Corp., 164 F.3d 887,

891-92 (4th Cir. 1999). By order of April 24, 2001, we granted the

limited remand, and the district court considered fully the evidence

Davis submitted in opposition to Appellee’s summary judgment

motion.* Because the basis for Davis’s notice of appeal was remedied

when we granted the limited remand and the district court granted

Davis’s Rule 60(b) motion and considered the opposition evidence

Davis filed, Davis’s ground for appeal was rendered moot. 

We therefore dismiss this appeal. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED

*Davis filed a second notice of appeal to the district court’s adverse

finding following full consideration of the claims, which has been

assigned appeal No. 01-2230, and which currently is pending with this

court in mediation. 

2 DAVIS v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE