alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 199 (Thursday, October 15, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 55321]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X98-11015]



========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
week.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 1998 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 55321]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyard Administration

7 CFR Part 800


General Regulations

CFR Correction

    In Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 700 to 899, 
revised as of Jan. 1, 1998, page 456, Sec. 800.0 paragraph (b)(59) is 
corrected to read as follows:


Sec. 800.0  Meaning of terms.

 * * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (59) Official agency. Any State or local government agency, or any 
person, designated by the Administrator pursuant to subsection (f) of 
section 7 of the Act for the conduct of official inspection (other than 
appeal inspection), or subsection (c) of section 7A of the Act for the 
conduct of Class X or Class Y weighing (other than review of weighing).
 * * * * *

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
Edwardo DE JUAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-0105

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 30, 2018 Rehearing Denied August 7, 2018

Edwardo De Juan, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Following a jury trial in 2011, Appellant was convicted of escape and sentenced to fifteen years in prison. In May 2017, Appellant filed a motion in the trial court pursuant to rule 3.800(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, seeking to correct what Appellant claimed was an illegal sentence. In his motion, Appellant contended that the elements of escape were not met because he only went onto the roof of Taylor Correctional Institution while he was in custody and did not actually leave the prison. *See* § 944.40, Fla. Stat. (2010) (providing the elements of escape and establishing the crime as a second degree felony). Appellant therefore argued that he was at worst guilty of attempted escape. The trial court dismissed the motion and Appellant brought this appeal.

Rule 3.800 is "not the correct procedural vehicle for attacking the merits of an underlying criminal conviction." *Echeverria v. State* , 949 So.2d 331, 335 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence cannot be raised in any kind of collateral postconviction motion. *See* *Smith v. State* , 41 So.3d 1037, 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) ("[C]laims of insufficient evidence have long been held to be procedurally barred in collateral proceedings."). The trial court was therefore correct to dismiss the rule 3.800(a) motion.

Furthermore, even if Appellant was correct and he was guilty of only attempted escape, an attempt to escape from lawful confinement satisfies that element of the crime of escape. *See* *Keel v. State* , 438 So.2d 850 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) ; Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 27.1. Escape, whether attempted or completed, is a second degree felony under section 944.40, punishable by up to fifteen years in prison pursuant to section 775.082(3)(c), Florida Statutes (2010). Appellant's fifteen year sentence was lawful.

AFFIRMED .

B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Bilbrey and Jay, JJ., concur.
ex10-7.htm




Exhibit 10.7







Current Named Executive Officer Salary and Bonus Arrangements for 2012







Base Salaries







The base salaries for 2012 for the following executive officers of Great Southern Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") and Great Southern Bank (the "Bank") currently are as follows:








	
Name and Title

	
Base Salary


	  
	  	  
	
William V. Turner

	
$200,000


	
Chairman of the Board of


	
the Company and the Bank


	  
	
Joseph W. Turner

	
$288,915


	
President and Chief


	
Executive Officer of the


	
Company and the Bank


	  
	
Rex A. Copeland

	
$252,144


	
Treasurer of the Company


	
and Senior Vice President and


	
Chief Financial Officer of the Bank


	  
	
Steven G. Mitchem

	
$236,946


	
Senior Vice President and Chief


	
Lending Officer of the Bank


	  
	
Douglas W. Marrs

	
$135,200


	
Secretary of the Company and


	
Secretary, Vice President – Operations


	
of the Bank


	  
	
Linton J. Thomason

	
$125,888


	
Vice President–Information Services


	
of the Bank


	  










Description of Bonus Arrangements







Pursuant to their employment agreements with the Company, each of Messrs. William V. Turner and Joseph W. Turner is entitled to an annual cash bonus equal to one-half of one percent of the Company's pre-tax net income.  For certain executive officers whose bonus arrangements are not governed by contract, the Company has maintained an incentive bonus arrangement under which the officers may earn a cash bonus of up to 15% of the officer's annual base salary, with up to 7.5% based on the extent to which the Company achieves targeted earnings per share results and up to 7.5% based on the officer's individual performance.
Antonio FIDDEMON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-982

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[June 28, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5119 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5119

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To prohibit the obligation or expenditure of funds available to any 
Federal department or agency for any fiscal year to purchase or issue a 
       license for the purchase of heavy water produced in Iran.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``No \2\H<INF>2</INF>O from Iran 
Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON OBLIGATION OR EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS TO PURCHASE 
              OR ISSUE A LICENSE FOR THE PURCHASE OF HEAVY WATER 
              PRODUCED IN IRAN.

    No funds available to any Federal department or agency for any 
fiscal year may be obligated or expended--
            (1) to purchase heavy water produced in Iran; or
            (2) to issue a license for the purchase of heavy water 
        produced in Iran.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 13, 2016.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
114th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5119

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To prohibit the obligation or expenditure of funds available to any 
Federal department or agency for any fiscal year to purchase or issue a 
       license for the purchase of heavy water produced in Iran.
```
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Inverse problems for torsional modes.      

      January 1, 1984    

Considers a spherically symmetric, non-rotating Earth consisting of an isotropic, perfect elastic material where the density and the S-wave velocity may have one or two discontinuities in the upper mantle. Shows that given the velocity throughout the mantle and the crust and given the density in the lower mantle, then the freqencies of the torsional oscillations of one angular order (one torsional spectrum), determine the density in the upper mantle and in the crust uniquely. If the velocity is known only in the lower mantle, then the frequencies of the torsional oscillations of two angular orders uniquely determine both the density and the velocity in the upper mantle and in the crust. In particular, the position and size of the discontinuities in the density and velocity are uniquely determined by two torsional spectra.-Author

## Citation Information
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                         1,810,000
<SECURITIES>                   9,993,000
<RECEIVABLES>                          0
<ALLOWANCES>                           0
<INVENTORY>                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              12,598,000
<PP&E>                        56,734,000
<DEPRECIATION>                         0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                72,950,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          4,208,000
<BONDS>                       45,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0
<PREFERRED>                            0
<COMMON>                           1,000
<OTHER-SE>                             0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  72,950,000
<SALES>                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       0
<CGS>                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 595,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                39,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (634,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                    (160,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    0
<DISCONTINUED>                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0
<CHANGES>                              0
<NET-INCOME>                    (474,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0



</TABLE>
Exhibit 15.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-141109 and No. 333-124015 on Form S-8 of Veolia Environnement of our reports dated April 13, 2012, relating to the consolidated statements of financial position of Veolia Environnement and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009 and January 1, 2009 and the related consolidated income statements, consolidated statements of comprehensive income, consolidated cash flow statements and consolidated statements of changes in equity for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2011 (our report thereon refers to the correction of errors in the comparative information relating to the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009) and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011 (our report thereon refers to the exclusion of Transdev from the assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011), which reports appear in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Veolia Environnement and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Paris La Défense, April 13, 2012.

|KPMG AUDIT
A division of KPMG SA | ERNST & YOUNG et Autres
|-------------------------------- | -----------------------
|                                 |                        
|Jay Nirsimloo                    | Baudouin Griton
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 84 (Friday, May 1, 1998)]
[Corrections]
[Page 24210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X98-20501]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97-CE-69-AD; Amendment 39-10437; AD 98-07-17]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation 
500, 520, 560, 680, 681, 685, 690, 695, and 720 Series Airplanes

Correction

    In rule document 98-8579, beginning on page 16679 in the issue of 
Monday, April 6, 1998, make the following corrections:


Sec. 39.13  [Corrected]

    On page 16680, in the third column, in Sec. 39.13, in the 
``Applicability'' section, in the table, in the first line, ``5500-A, 
5500-B, 5500-S, 5500-U'' should read ``500-A, 500-B, 500-S, 500-U''. In 
the second line, ``5560, 5560-A, 5560-E, and 5560-F'' should read 
``560, 560-A, 560-E, and 560-F''.
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
Rohbanni WILSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4628

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

August 7, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Joanna A. Mauer, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Kaitlin Weiss, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED . *See**Romero v. State* , 105 So.3d 550, 553-54 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (holding that *Graham v. Florida* , 560 U.S. 48, 130 S.Ct. 2011, 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), does not apply to offenders eighteen years of age or older).

Wolf, Lewis, and Ray, JJ., concur.
Donald Lee ROGERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-0414

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 18, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

In this *Anders** appeal, we affirm Appellant's judgment and sentences, but remand for the trial court to enter a written order specifying that Appellant admitted violating only certain conditions of probation., as alleged in Grounds VI-XIV of the amended affidavit of violation of probation. *See**Pittman v. State* , 867 So.2d 621, 622 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (remanding for entry of formal order revoking probation that listed only the violations that had been admitted); *Narvaez v. State* , 674 So.2d 868, 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (noting that written order of revocation must comport with the oral pronouncement and remanding with instructions to strike violations neither admitted to nor found by the court from the order). Appellant need not be present.

AFFIRMED but REMANDED for correction.

B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Lewis and Makar, JJ., concur.

*

*Anders v. California* , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
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 Quarterly Report of TippingPoint Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 30, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John F. McHale, Chairman of the Board and 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:



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



2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as
of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate, effective as of June 13, 2003.



/s/    JOHN F. MCHALEJohn F. McHale,Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer TippingPoint Technologies, Inc.




Note 1: The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.



Note 2: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to TippingPoint Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by TippingPoint Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 13.1  Section 906 Certification (pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) 
 In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 of AIXTRON SE (the Company) as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission) on or about the date hereof (the Report) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned, in the capacity set forth below, hereby certifies, that, to the best of his knowledge:  (1)the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  (2)the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   /s/ MARTIN GOETZELERName:
Martin GoetzelerTitle:
Chairman, President and   Chief Executive Officer/s/ WOLFGANG BREMEName:
Wolfgang BremeTitle:
Executive Vice President   and Chief Financial Officer  Date: February 25, 2014  A signed original of this written statement, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting each of the signatures appearing in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company in accordance with the applicable provisions of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the related rules and regulations.  This written statement accompanies the Annual Report on Form 20-F in which it appears as an Exhibit pursuant to Section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 or other applicable law, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.  1
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

RE: Jose Gafas Case Number 21-11561-RAM 

TRUSTEE'S NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY FOR CONFIRMATION & RECOMMENDATION

The Trustee reviewed this case and found the following deficiencies remain unresolved from the Trustee’s letter 

requesting documents and prior deficiencies and thus objects as follows (If this case is dismissed, this 

deficiency is an objection to reinstatement until all documents are received or all issues are addressed): 

WRITTEN RESPONSE TO ISSUES RAISED AND/OR DOCUMENTS REQUESTED MUST BE

RECEIVED BY 5PM AT LEAST FIFTEEN DAYS (NOT INCLUDING HOLIDAYS) PRIOR TO THE 

CONFIRMATION HEARING TO AVOID DISMISSAL. Please note: documents that were not timely

filed/received by the trustee may not be considered as there is not sufficient time for an additional review of this 

case. Call the Trustee's case administration department prior to “re-sending” documents. The Trustee 

reserves the right to raise additional objections UNTIL all documents are timely provided to the Trustee and 

reviewed for possible issues raised and additional documents needed. 

The debtor or debtor’s attorney must appear at the confirmation hearing even if they pre-hear with the 

Trustee. The debtor may be dismissed for failure to fund the plan if they are delinquent in payments. 

The Court may dismiss this case if no one appears to represent the debtor at the confirmation hearing.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: IF THE DEBTOR(S) OBJECTS TO THE TRUSTEE'S RECOMMENDATION, THE

DEBTOR'S ATTORNEY MUST CONTACT THE TRUSTEE'S OFFICE AND SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY 

BEFORE 2PM THE LAST BUSINESS DAY PRIOR TO THE CONFIRMATION HEARING TO SEEK A 

RESOLUTION OR THE RECOMMENDATION WILL BE DEEMED UNCONTESTED BY THE DEBTOR. 

===============================================================================

Recommendation for the next confirmation hearing. Documents received or filed fewer than 14 days prior to 

the confirmation hearing may not be included in this review. 

REVIEWED: October 5, 2021 1:41

CASE PENDING OVER 8 MONTHS Bar Date: 4/29 

3A Plan served 8/18/21

If Counsel for the Debtor(s) appears at confirmation, confirms service, and agrees on the record: 

Continue to November 9, 

On or before Friday October 22, 2021 remains unresolved since 9/21: a) Does not fund month 44 -60; b) MMM 

denied, need to amend plan to conform or surrender

**Amended plans must use new plan form (6/4/21). Debtor attorney must call 3 business days prior to hearing

(Thursday 9 - 2) to request Trustee to review late amended plans with no material change***

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served through ECF on the debtor’s attorney or by U.S. First Class prepaid Mail on the pro se debtor on the same day filed with the Court.

Submitted by

NANCY K. NEIDICH, ESQ, STANDING CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE

P.O. BOX 279806, MIRAMAR, FL 33027, (954) 443-4402

Case 21-11561-RAM Doc 56 Filed 10/07/21 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Bradford Miller, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of BGR Corporation;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report; and

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

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures for the issuer and have:

     (i)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
          material information relating to the issuer is made known to me,
          particularly during the period in which the periodic reports are being
          prepared;
     (ii) Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer's disclosure controls and
          procedures as of June 30, 2004; and
     (iii)Presented in the report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
          disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of the
          Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the issuer's
     auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors (or persons
     fulfilling the equivalent function):

     (i)  All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the issuer's ability to record,
          process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for
          the issuer's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls
          (none were so noted); and
     (ii) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the issuer's internal
          controls (none were so noted); and

6.   I have indicated in the report whether or not there were significant
     changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly
     affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent
     evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
     deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: October 18, 2004

/s/ Bradford Miller
--------------------------
Bradford Miller
President