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

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Magnitude and frequency of floods for urban streams in Alabama, 2007      

      January 1, 2010    

Methods of estimating flood magnitudes for exceedance probabilities of 50, 20, 10, 4, 2, 1, 0.5, and 0.2 percent have been developed for urban streams in Alabama that are not significantly affected by dams, flood detention structures, hurricane storm surge, or substantial tidal fluctuations. Regression relations were developed using generalized least-squares regression techniques to estimate flood magnitude and frequency on ungaged streams as a function of the basin drainage area and percentage of basin developed. These methods are based on flood-frequency characteristics for 20 streamgaging stations in Alabama and 3 streamgaging stations in adjacent States having 10 or more years of record through September 2007.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Contact

#### Lower Mississippi-Gulf Water Science Center - Nashville, TN Office

640 Grassmere Park DriveNashville, TN37211United States

GS-W-TNnsh Webmaster@usgs.gov

(615) 837-4700

(615) 837-4799 

### Explore Search

                  - Water
                  - Alabama

View All **
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 1 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 2 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 3 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 4 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 5 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 6 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 7 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 8 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 9 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 10 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 11 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 12 of 13
Case 19-23176-AJC Doc 1 Filed 10/01/19 Page 13 of 13
LETTER OF CONSENT








TO:     Pengrowth Energy Corporation


2100, 222-3 rd Avenue SW


Calgary, Alberta T2P OB4


We hereby consent to the reference to our name and report evaluating Pengrowth Energy Corporation’s oil and gas reserves as of December 31, 2016 and the information derived from our reports, as described or incorporated by reference in: (i) Pengrowth Energy Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2016 and (ii) the Registration Statements on Form F-3D (File No. 333-180888) and Form F-10 (File No. 333-204089) filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, as applicable.


Yours truly,


GLJ PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS LTD.








/s/ "Todd J. Ikeda"


Todd J. Ikeda, P. Eng


Vice President





Calgary, Alberta


February 28, 2017


______________________________________________________________


4100, 400 - 3rd Avenue S.W., Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 4H2  |  (403) 266-9500  | GLJPC.com
Michael Deon DRAPER v. STATE

CR-15-0646

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

May 26, 2017 Reh. denied June 16, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Case 19-20094-AJC Doc 45 Filed 08/30/21 Page 1 of 7
Case 19-20094-AJC Doc 45 Filed 08/30/21 Page 2 of 7
August 30, 2021

Morgan Longhurst

Morgan Longhurst

Email: mlonghurst@raslg.com

Case 19-20094-AJC Doc 45 Filed 08/30/21 Page 3 of 7
Case 19-20094-AJC Doc 45 Filed 08/30/21 Page 4 of 7
Case 19-20094-AJC Doc 45 Filed 08/30/21 Page 5 of 7
Case 19-20094-AJC Doc 45 Filed 08/30/21 Page 6 of 7
Case 19-20094-AJC Doc 45 Filed 08/30/21 Page 7 of 7
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

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

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

March 28, 2014

d0324 

# Order

Clerk March 28, 2014

148180

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148180

COA: 313647

Oakland CC: 2007

- 216132

- FH

JAMES GREGORY DENT,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 8, 2013

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
A.C.C., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Joseph SEEBER, Superintendent, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1397

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
April 18, 2008

Steve Majkut, Chief

Office of Air Resources RI Department of Environmental Management

235 Promenade Street Providence, RI 02908

RE: Updated Emissions Budgets for 2008 and 2009

Dear Mr. Majkut:

The Rhode Island Statewide Planning Progr am (RISPP), as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the State of Rhode Island, is pleased to be working cooperatively with the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) as you update mobile source emissions budgets for 2008 and 2009.

RISPP has provided RIDEM with the on-road mobile source emission inventories for the State Implementation Plan (SIP), including the projected emission inventories and the current mobile source emissions budget. As you requested, attached is a report documenting the 2008 and 2009 on-road mobile source emissions inventories to assist in the development of updated emission budgets. This is a revised version of the report sent in February, and it corrects a couple of technical errors that have brought to our attention.

The RISPP is currently in the process of updating both our long range surface transportation plan and the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for FY 2009-2012. Both of these documents are subject to air quality conformity determinations. Conformity relies on the same modeling process on which the emissions inventories are calculated. We respectfully request the following budgets:

Figures in Tons/Day 2007 Budget 2008 Inventory 2008 Proposed

Budget 2009 Inventory 2009 Proposed

Budget

VOC’s 30.68 24.14 24.64 22.75 22.75

NOX 33.97 27.76 28.26 25.29 25.29

It is our understanding from RIDEM that the budget for 2008 can be set somewhat higher than the inventory (half ton), and we appreciate your willingness to do so. However it has been determined that this is not the case in 2009, and the budgets will likely be set at the same level asthe inventory. Should any other mechanism arise under which a buffer can be accommodated in the 2009 budgets, we would like to be informed of that as soon as possible.

We feel that the proposed budgets are consistent with RIDEM’s emissions reductions goals and also provide RISPP with some level of comfort going forward that we can meet conformity requirements. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please feel free to contact Katherine Trapani (401) 222-6479 of my staff if you have any questions on this request.

Sincerely,

Jared L. Rhodes II

Chief

Enclosure: Rhode Island 2008 and 2009 Mobile Source Emissions (VHB) (revised)

cc: George Johnson, RISPP Katherine Trapani, RISPP Bob Shawver, RIDOT
# L_2007204EN.01002803.xml

| 4.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 204/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 204/28

---

Corrigendum to Directive 2004/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens or mutagens at work (Sixth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Council Directive 89/391/EEC) (Codified version)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 158 of 30 April 2004
  . Corrected version in
  Official Journal of the European Union L 229 of 29 June 2004
  )

In the following Act, the place of signature is to be corrected as follows:

for:

‘Done at Strasbourg, 29 April 2004.’,

read:

‘Done at Brussels, 29 April 2004.’

---
NO. 12-10-00228-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

' APPEAL FROM THE 402ND

IN THE INTEREST OF 

M.K., C.K. 

AND H.K., ' JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

MINOR CHILDREN

' WOOD COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Tracy Knight attempts to appeal from an order holding her in contempt and 

confining her for failing to pay court ordered child support. 

A contempt order is reviewable only by a petition for writ of habeas corpus (if the 

person in contempt is confined) or a petition for writ of mandamus (if no confinement is 

involved). Cadle Co. v. Lobingier, 50 S.W.3d 662, 671 (Tex. App.–Fort Worth 2001, 

pet. denied) (citing In re Long, 984 S.W.2d 623, 625 (Tex. 1999) (orig. proceeding)). 

We have no jurisdiction to review contempt orders by direct appeal. Tex. Animal Health 

Comm’n v. Nunley, 647 S.W.2d 951, 952 (Tex. 1983); Ex parte Cardwell, 416 S.W.2d 

382, 384 (Tex. 1967) (orig. proceeding); Wagner v. Warnasch, 156 Tex. 334, 339, 295 

S.W.2d 890, 893 (1956).

On July 22, 2010, this court notified Appellant that her notice of appeal does not 

show this court’s jurisdiction in that it does not refer to and is not accompanied by a final 

judgment or appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1. Appellant was further informed 

that the appeal would be dismissed unless the information received in the appeal was 

amended on or before August 23, 2010 to show this court’s jurisdiction. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. Appellant responded by providing a file marked copy of the “Order 
Holding Respondent in Contempt” and the “Commitment Order.” However, these orders 

do not show the jurisdiction of this court. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want 

of jurisdiction.

Opinion delivered August 4, 2010.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

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

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 25, 2010 

Order 

 

January 25, 2010 

139966 (16) 

CREAMUS PAXTON HOWARD, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 SC: 139966 

v COA: 293630 

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

___________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, the motion for reconsideration of the order of 

December 4, 2009 is considered and it is DENIED because it does not appear the order 

was entered erroneously.
Form CGFCRD3 (7/14/2020)

United States Bankruptcy Court

 Southern District of Florida

www.flsb.uscourts.gov

Case Number: 18−16248−MAM Adversary Number: 19−01298−MAM

In re:

Name of Debtor(s): Chance & Anthem, LLC

 −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−/

Robert C Furr

Plaintiff(s)

VS.

Jeffrey M Siskind, Siskind Legal Services, Tanya Siskind, Second

Siskind Family Trust, CannaMed Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Sovereign

Gaming and Entertainment, LLC, Florida's Association of Community

Banks and Credit Unions, Incorporated, Sympatico Equine Rescue,

Inc. and Robert Gibson

Defendant(s)

 −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−/

NOTICE OF HEARING

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a hearing will be held before the Honorable Mindy A Mora

on September 30, 2020 at 11:00 AM

by TELEPHONE through CourtSolutions LLC.

To participate through CourtSolutions, you must make a reservation in advance no later than 3:00

p.m., one business day before the date of the hearing. Reservations should be arranged online at

https://www.court−solutions.com If a party is unable to register online, a reservation may also be

made by telephone at (917) 746−7476.

**EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY** Until further notice or unless directed otherwise, the court will ONLY hold

hearings by TELEPHONE. Individuals not represented by counsel will be able to use the telephonic

services FREE of charge. All attorneys shall advise their clients NOT to appear at the courthouse.

to consider the following:

Emergency Motion to Extend Time to Submit Expert Reports Filed by Defendant Jeffrey M Siskind

(455)

THE MOVANT (OR MOVANT'S COUNSEL if represented by an attorney) SHALL SERVE A COPY OF

THIS NOTICE OF HEARING and, unless previously served, the above−described pleading on all required

parties within the time frames required by the Bankruptcy Rules, Local Rules, or orders of the Court, and

shall file a certificate of service as required under Local Rules 2002−1(F) and 9073−1(B). Any party

who fails to properly serve any pleadings or other paper may be denied the opportunity to be heard

thereon.

PLEASE NOTE: Photo identification is required to gain entrance to all federal courthouse facilities.

Electronic devices, including but not limited to cameras, cellular phones (including those with cameras),

iPads, tablets, pagers, personal data assistants (PDA), laptop computers, radios, tape−recorders, etc., are

not permitted in the courtroom, chambers or other environs of this court. These restrictions (except for

cameras not integrated into a cell phone device) do not apply to attorneys with a valid Florida Bar

identification card, attorneys who have been authorized to appear by pro hac vice order and witnesses

subpoenaed to appear in a specific case. No one is permitted to bring a camera or other prohibited

electronic device into a federal courthouse facility except with a written order signed by a judge

and verified by the United States Marshal's Service. See Local Rule 5072−2.

Dated: 9/24/20 CLERK OF COURT

By: Maria Romaguera−Serfaty

Case 19-01298-MAM Doc 456 Filed 09/24/20 Page 1 of 2
Courtroom Deputy

Case 19-01298-MAM Doc 456 Filed 09/24/20 Page 2 of 2
Monday, 

July 2, 2007 

Part IV 

Department of 

Commerce 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Availability of Grant Funds for Fiscal 

Year 2008; Notice 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES3
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

www.flsb.uscourts.gov

In re: Case No: 19-23123 LMI

Chapter 13

 Marty L. Taylor-Bey

Debtor /

NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE BY ATTORNEY FOR DEBTOR WITH LOCAL RULE

2083-1(B) CLAIMS REVIEW REQUIREMENT

The undersigned attorney for debtor certifies that a review of the claims register 

and all claims filed in the above referenced case has been completed in accordance 

with Local Rule 2083-1(B) and that:

1) X No further action is necessary.

2) The following actions have been taken:

The debtor has filed an objection to the proof of claim filed by

.

The debtor has filed a amended plan or modified plan to provide 

for the proof of claim filed by .

Other:

.

A copy of this certificate of compliance was served on the chapter 13 trustee via 

the NEF and the debtor via U.S. Mail on October 16, 2020.

Respectfully submitted,

 LEGAL SERVICES OF GREATER MIAMI, INC.

 By /s/ 

 Carolina A. Lombardi

 Florida Bar No. 241970

Attorney for Debtor

4343 West Flagler Street #100

Miami, FL 33134

 Telephone and Facsimile: 305-438-2427

 Email: CLombardi@legalservicesmiami.org 

 Alt.: SFeire@legalservicesmiami.org

LF-76 (rev. 12/01/09)

Case 19-23123-LMI Doc 86 Filed 10/16/20 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 31.2I, Karim Hirji, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Oilsands Quest Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) andhave: (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant is made known to us by others, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  (b) [Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transition instructions containedin SEC Release 34-47986]  (c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors; (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.December 14, 2007/s/ Karim Hirji
* 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.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 96-60276

Summary Calendar

__________________

CHARLES EDWARD WILSON,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

JAMES V. ANDERSON, SUPERINTENDENT,

MISSISSIPPI STATE PENITENTIARY

Respondent-Appellee.

______________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Southern District of Mississippi

(3:95-cv-819-BN)

______________________________________________

October 31, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Charles Edward Wilson, a Mississippi prisoner, # 44482-53975,

appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254

habeas corpus petition as an abuse of the writ. Wilson has

abandoned any claims that he had “cause” for filing a successive
2

petition. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.

1993) (issues not briefed on appeal are deemed abandoned).

Wilson’s assertion that he was “actually innocent” of the crimes

for which he was convicted is not supported by “new reliable

evidence.” See Schlup v. Delo, 115 S. Ct. 851, 865, 867 (1995).

AFFIRMED.
**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 Sunway Global Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-Q/A for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Liu Bo, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section  
1350 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 results of operations of
                  the
                  Company.  A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
        and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to
      be
      incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before
      or
      after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in
      such
      filing.





Date:
                July 25, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                Liu BoLiu
                Bo
              Chief
                Executive Officer
              (principal
                executive officer)
Exhibit 4.191




Exhibit 4.191







 


	
   	
   	
   

 
 



SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 16, 2007 –WALENCIAK


THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into effective as of June 9, 2011 (the “Effective Date”), by and between Nevada Geothermal Power Company, a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) and Max Walenciak (“Employee”), with reference to the following: THE ABOVE REFERENCED AGREEMENT IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:


	1.	

   Clause 4.1(b) is restated with regards to accrued vacation per annum, i.e. the Employee may accrue up, but not exceeding, eight (8) weeks of paid vacation.

	 	

   

	2.	

   Clause 4.1(c) which is amended as follows:

	 	

   

	 	

   For the additional period up to December 31, 2011, the Company will pay $1,100.00 per month towards the cost of interim Reno rental accommodation. This interim Reno rental supplement shall be reviewed on an annual basis on the anniversary date of December 31.

	 	

   

	3.	

   Clause 4.1(d) is amended by extending the period of time for reimbursement of moving expenses should the Employee find permanent accommodation in Reno, as contemplated in Clause 4.1(c).

	 	

   

	4.	

   Clause 5.6(b) is amended in sub-paragraph (i) by replacing the words “six (6) months” by “twelve (12) months”; in sub-paragraph (ii) by replacing the words “six (6) equal payments” to “twelve (12) equal payments”; and in sub-paragraph (iii) by replacing “six (6) equal monthly payments” by “twelve (12) equal monthly payments”.

	 	

   

	5.	

   Clause 5.6(f) is amended by replacing the words “twelve (12) months by “eighteen (18) months” and the words “twelve (12) equal monthly payments” to “eighteen (18) equal monthly payments”.

















	
    	
   



In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written.




				
	 		NEVADA GEOTHERMAL POWER CO.
	 		Per:	 
	 	 		Brian Fairbank, President and CEO
	SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED by	)		 
	MAX WALENCIAK in the presence of:	)		 
	 	)		 
	 	)		 
	 	)		 
	 	)		 
	 	)		Max Walenciak
	 	)		 
	 	)		 
	 	)		 
	 	)		 
	 	)