alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 19594]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9778]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Importer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    This is notice that on March 10, 2009, Penick Corporation, 33 
Industrial Park Road, Pennsville, New Jersey 08070, made application by 
renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for registration 
as an importer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed in 
schedule II.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coca Leaves (9040)...........................................         II
Raw Opium (9600).............................................         II
Poppy Straw (9650)...........................................         II
Concentrate of Poppy Straw (9670)............................         II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to import the listed controlled substances to 
manufacture bulk controlled substance intermediates for sale to its 
customers.
    As noted in a previous notice published in the Federal Register on 
September 23, 1975 (40 FR 43745), all applicants for registration to 
import a basic class of any controlled substances in schedule I or II 
are, and will continue to be, required to demonstrate to the Deputy 
Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 
Administration, that the requirements for such registration pursuant to 
21 U.S.C. 958(a); 21 U.S.C. 823(a); and 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d), 
(e), and (f) are satisfied.

    Dated: April 17, 2009.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-9778 Filed 4-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
# Official Journal L 11/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 11 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6315 January 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 11

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6315 January 2020

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/21 of 14 January 2020 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 79/2012 laying down detailed rules for implementing certain provisions of Council Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 concerning administrative cooperation and combating fraud in the field of value added tax | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/21 of 14 January 2020 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 79/2012 laying down detailed rules for implementing certain provisions of Council Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 concerning administrative cooperation and combating fraud in the field of value added tax

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6674

EPHRAIN RELIFORD, JR.,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

MICHAEL MOORE, Director of SCDC; ATTORNEY

GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-97-887-3-17BC)

Submitted: September 11, 1997 Decided: October 17, 1997

Before RUSSELL, MURNAGHAN, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ephrain Reliford, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* We note that Appellant need not seek authorization from this

Court under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244 (West Supp. 1997) but rather should

exhaust his state court remedies. See In re Vial, 115 F.3d 1192,

1194 n.6 (4th Cir. 1997) (citing Benton v. Washington, 106 F.3d

162, 164 (7th Cir. 1996) (stating that when a § 2254 petition is

dismissed for failure to exhaust state court remedies, courts do

not treat a subsequent petition, after exhaustion, as "a second

petition" under Rule 9(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases

in the United States District Courts); Camarano v. Irvin, 98 F.3d

44, 46-47 (2d Cir. 1996) (holding that a petition filed after a

prior petition was dismissed for failure to exhaust state court

remedies is not a "`second or successive' petition within the

meaning of § 2244.")).

2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.

1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning

of the district court.* Reliford v. Attorney General of South Carolina, No. CA-97-887-3-17BC (D.S.C. May 2, 1997). 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
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-20451

Summary Calendar

STEPHEN PAUL SHARP;

JACOB BRYAN SHARP,

Plaintiffs,

STEPHEN PAUL SHARP,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

NOBLE DRILLING CORPORATION, ET AL.,

Defendants,

NOBLE DRILLING CORPORATION, ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(H-95-CV-5215)

January 23, 1998

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, HIGGINBOTHAM and PARKER, Circuit Judges.* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

2 PER CURIAM: *

Stephen Paul Sharp and Jacob Ryan Sharp, adult children of Roger Alan

Sharp who was killed in an acci dent on November 14, 1994, while employed by

Noble Offshore Corporation on an offshore drilling rig near the coast of Nigeria,

appeal an adverse summary judgment dismissing their Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 688,

and individual survivorship claims under 45 U.S.C. § 59. The trial court held that

despite his claims to the contrary, Stephen Paul Sharp was not the properly

constituted personal representative of the deceased and, as a consequence, had no

standing to bring the subject action. The court à quo also found that neither

appellant had the requisite standing to bring an individual action under 45 U.S.C.

§ 59.

We concur with the essentially uncontested findings by the district court and,

based on the authori ties cited and analysis made in the trial court’s carefully

considered and scholarly Memorandum and Order signed July 3, 1996 and entered

of record on July 5, 1996, we AFFIRM.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

In re:

LOUIS FISHER Case No. 19-19710-SMG 

 Chapter 7 

Debtor.

 / 

ORDER GRANTING DEBTOR ATTORNEY’S 

MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND DISCHARGE ATTORNEY (ECF 46)

THIS CAUSE having come before the court on January 9, 2020 for a hearing on the Debtor

Attorney’s Motion to Withdraw and Discharge Attorney (ECF 46). Based upon counsel’s assertions

made in support of the Motion, having considered the record in this case, and being duly advised in

the premises, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. The Debtor Attorney’s Motion is GRANTED. 

2. The Debtor’s Attorneys, Christian J. Olson, Esq., Mitchell J. Nowack, Esq. and

Nowack & Olson, PLLC, are relieved from any further responsibility in representing the Debtor in

this case. All further notices and pleadings shall be served upon the Debtor at the following address:

Louis Tino Fisher

5440 NW 12th Court 

Lauderhill, FL 33313 

###

ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on January 10, 2020.

Scott M. Grossman, Judge

United States Bankruptcy Court

_____________________________________________________________________________

Case 19-19710-SMG Doc 52 Filed 01/10/20 Page 1 of 2
Submitted by:

Mitchell J. Nowack, Esq.

NOWACK & OLSON, PLLC

8551 Sunrise Blvd., Suite 208

Plantation, FL 33322

(954) 349-2265

Copies furnished to:

Attorney Nowack is directed to serve a conformed copy of this Order to all creditors and interested

parties immediately upon receipt and file a certificate of service.

Case 19-19710-SMG Doc 52 Filed 01/10/20 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.1


           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
                         RULE 13a-14(b) OR 15d-14(b) AND
                             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 Hawksdale  Financial  Visions,
Inc.  (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for quarter ended March 31, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Christina Escobedo, President and Chief Executive Officer and Director of the
Company,  certifies  for the purpose of  complying  with Rule  13a-14(b) or Rule
15d-14(b)  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934  (the  "Exchange  Act") and
Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, that:

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

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




Dated: August 30, 2004                    By:  /s/ CHRISTINA ESCOBEDO
                                          _____________________________________
                                          Christina Escobedo
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
                                          and Director
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2875 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2875

 To suspend temporarily the duty on diaper pads with an outer layer of 
 water-resistant laminated knitted fabric of polyester and with other 
    fabric layers of either blends of hemp and cotton or polyester 
                              microfleece.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 8, 2012

  Mr. Baucus introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on diaper pads with an outer layer of 
 water-resistant laminated knitted fabric of polyester and with other 
    fabric layers of either blends of hemp and cotton or polyester 
                              microfleece.

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

SECTION 1. DIAPER PADS WITH AN OUTER LAYER OF WATER-RESISTANT LAMINATED 
              KNITTED FABRIC OF POLYESTER AND WITH OTHER FABRIC LAYERS 
              OF EITHER BLENDS OF HEMP AND COTTON OR POLYESTER 
              MICROFLEECE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Diaper pads,        Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        designed to be                                                     31/2015.......
                        inserted in
                        diapers or diaper
                        shells, the
                        foregoing with an
                        outer layer of
                        water-resistant
                        laminated knitted
                        fabric of
                        polyester and
                        with other fabric
                        layers of either
                        blends of hemp
                        and cotton or
                        polyester
                        microfleece, with
                        elastic gussets
                        to absorb
                        moisture near the
                        wearer's legs,
                        with snaps or
                        other fasteners
                        to hold the pads
                        in place
                        (providing for in
                        subheading
                        9619.00.68)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
* District Judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana,

sitting by designation.

** Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 01-50113

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. BOBBY LEE EARLS Defendant-Appellant

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

_________________________________________________________________ November 6, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, DAVIS, Circuit Judge, and VANCE * , District Judge. PER CURIAM: ** Defendant–Appellant Bobby Lee Earls appeals his conviction on one count of possession with intent to distribute five grams or more of cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). Specifically, Earls challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress the evidence seized as a2

result of what Earls contends was an illegal stop and detention. We need not decide whether the information contained in the anonymous tip alone was sufficiently reliable to provide reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop. The combination of the anonymous tip and the independent corroborating observations of the investigating officers--the shouted warning by the woman in the apartment complex, Earls’s evasive and nervous behavior, and his presence in an area known for drug trafficking--was sufficient to provide the officers with reasonable suspicion to stop the cab in which Earls was riding. See Illinois v. Wardlow , 528 U.S. 119, 124 (2000). The motion to suppress was correctly denied. Earls’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.2
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Byron Cox, Chief Financial Officer of Fairchild International Corporation, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Fairchild International Corporation;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this  report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

1. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
2. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
3. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

1. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

1. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
2. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 12, 2004

/s/ Byron Cox

_____________________________
Byron Cox, Secretary, Treasurer
and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 4.20





FIRST AMENDING AGREEMENT



This First Amending Agreement dated as of the 14th day of February, 2003.



Between:



MAD CATZ INTERACTIVE, INC. (Mad Catz)



- and -



FIRE INTERNATIONAL LTD. and its related companies (Fire)



Whereas:



| | (a) |  | Mad Catz and Fire entered in to an agreement dated January 17, 2003 (the Agreement) regarding the manufacture and distribution of certain CD products, as more
particularly described in the Agreement;
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) |  | Mad Catz and Fire have agreed to amend certain terms of the Agreement, as more particularly set out herein;
| | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Now therefore for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:



|1. |  | Amendment to the Agreement.Effective as of the date of the Agreement, the Agreement is amended by deleting paragraph 5 in its entirety and replacing it with the following:
|-- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



5. Mad Catz shall acquire the CD products
produced by Fire at the [* * *]. Fire shall not allow the supplier to increase the cost of goods without the consent of Mad Catz.



|2. |  | Governing Law. This First Amending Agreement is governed by English law.
|-- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. |  | Confirmation of Agreement. The parties acknowledge that all of the terms and provisions of the Agreement, as amended hereby, are and remain in full force and effect.
|-- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



In witness whereof the parties have
executed this First Amending Agreement as of the date set out above.



MAD CATZ INTERACTIVE, INC.Per:

/s/    MORRIS
PERLISMorris Perlis President and CEOFIRE INTERNATIONAL LTD., for itself and its related companiesPer:

/s/    JASON
COOPERJason Cooper Managing Director




[*] CERTAIN MATERIAL (INDICATED
BY AN ASTERISK) HAS BEEN OMITTED FROM THIS DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT. THE OMITTED MATERIAL HAS BEEN FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION.
## NUMBER 13

- 1 9

- 00 405

- CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

KYLE KIRBY

, A ppellant

,

v.

ROGER BUERGNER

, A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

of Victoria County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Hinojosa and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina

Appellant, Kyle Kirby , appealed a judgment entered by the County Court at Law

No. 1 of Victoria County, Texas. On September 9, 2019 , the Clerk of th is Court notified

appellant , in accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c), that we would

dismiss this appeal unless the $ 205 .00 filing fee was paid. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 42.3(c)

.2 Appellant has not responded to the notice from the Clerk or paid the $ 205 .00 filing fee.

See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 5, 12.1(b).

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant ’ s failure to pay

the filing fee , is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. 42.3(b),(c).

According ly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.

JAIME TIJERINA

, Justice

D elivered and filed the

10th d ay of October, 2019