alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20539-20540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10206]



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



NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Regulatory Guide; Issuance, Availability

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a revision to a guide 
in its Regulatory Guide Series. This series has been developed to 
describe and make available to the public such information as methods 
acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the 
Commission's regulations, techniques used by the staff in evaluating 
specific problems or postulated accidents, and data needed by the staff 
in its review of applications for permits and licenses.
    Revision 3 of Regulatory Guide 1.118, ``Periodic Testing of 
Electric Power and Protection Systems,'' describes a method acceptable 
to the NRC staff for complying with the Commission's regulations with 
respect to the periodic testing of the electric power and protection 
systems.
    Comments and suggestions in connection with items for inclusion in 
guides currently being developed or improvements in all published 
guides are encouraged at any time. Written comments may be submitted to 
the Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of 
Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
    Regulatory guides are available for inspection at the Commission's 
Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC. Copies of 
issued guides may be purchased from the Government Printing Office at 
the current GPO price. Information on current GPO prices may be 
obtained by contracting the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. 
Government Printing Office, Post Office Box 37082, Washington, DC 
20013-7082, telephone (202) 512-2249. Issued guides may also be 
purchased from the National Technical Information Service on a standing 
order basis. Details on this service may be obtained by writing NTIS, 
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.

(5 U.S.C. 552(a))

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of April 1995.

    [[Page 20540]] For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 Eric S. Beckjord,
Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
[FR Doc. 95-10206 Filed 4-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 81 (Thursday, April 27, 1995)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 20750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10310]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--U.S. Department of Commerce Advanced Technology 
Program (ATP)/National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 
Project No. 94-02-0048 ``Manufacturing Composite Structures for the 
Offshore Oil Industry''

    Notice is hereby given that, on March 17, 1995, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Westinghouse Electric 
Corporation, acting on behalf of the participants in the ATP/NIST 
Project No. 94-02-0048, has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
(1) the identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objective of 
the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) 
of the Act, the identities of the parties to the project are: ABB Vetco 
Gray Inc., Houston, TX; Hercules Inc., Wilmington, DE; Reading & Bates 
Development Company, Houston, TX; Texaco, Inc., Belaire, TX; The Texas 
Engineering Experiment Station, College Station, TX; and Westinghouse 
Electric Corporation, Sunnyvale, CA.
    The nature and objective of the research program performed in 
accordance with the ATP/NIST Project No. 94-02-0048 is to develop 
advanced composite technology which will lead to the commercialization 
of affordable high quality advanced tubular structures for the Offshore 
Oil Industry.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-10310 Filed 4-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
Thomas A. DELANNO, Jr., a/k/a Thomas Delannoy and Sourilath Delannoy, Appellants, v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR CITIGROUP MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-WFHE2, Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-WFHE2; Brookshire Estates Homeowners Association, Inc.; and United States of America, Internal Revenue Service, Appellees.

Case No. 2D17-3703

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 5, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Freemel BEST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5201

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 20, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Corey Anthony JOHNSON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1731

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 25, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Case 5:05-cv-01668-RMW Document 32 Filed 01/25/06 Page 1 of 2
Case 5:05-cv-01668-RMW Document 32 Filed 01/25/06 Page 2 of 2
Lawrence CRAWFORD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3030

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 9, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Chrisshawn ARRINGTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-4676

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-1028

GEOFFREY R. AKERS, DR., P.E.-, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

 v. 

CARLOS GUTIERREZ, Secretary of Commerce; PATRICIA BOYLAN, 

Director-OCR/US Patent Office, 

 Defendants - Appellees. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior 

District Judge. (1:07-cv-01000-CMH-TCB) 

Submitted: July 30, 2009 Decided: August 3, 2009 

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Geoffrey R. Akers, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., 

Monika L. Moore, Catherine DeRoever Wood, Assistant United 

States Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Geoffrey R. Akers appeals the district court’s order 

granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants in his 

employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record 

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. Akers v. Gutierrez, No. 

1:07-cv-01000-CMH-TCB (E.D. Va. filed July 30, 2008 & entered 

Aug. 1, 2008). We deny Akers’ motion for a copy of the record. 

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. 

AFFIRMED
Case 4:17-cr-00054-PJH Document 12 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
JUNE 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 </LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000709005
<NAME> NOBLE ROMAN'S, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         256,559
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,046,854
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (100,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,003,520
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,874,622
<PP&E>                                      13,267,279
<DEPRECIATION>                             (4,090,022)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              20,215,265
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,957,957
<BONDS>                                     12,940,199
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,458,431
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,702,821)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                20,215,265
<SALES>                                     16,860,810
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,101,730
<CGS>                                        3,308,766
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,947,734
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,467,937
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             762,642
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,713,349)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (599,672)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,113,677)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (48,750)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,162,427)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.28)
        

</TABLE>
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: STIPULATION TO EXTEND 

CLASS CERTIFICATION MOTION DEADLINES

Case Nos. 3:17-cv-00123-JST/17-CV-03850-JST

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO

JON VALLIERE, EILEEN FOSTER, ANTONIO 

GARCIA, and SAMANTHA WEST, individually 

and on behalf of all similarly situated current and 

former employees,

Plaintiffs,

v.

TESORO REFINING AND MARKETING 

COMPANY LLC, TESORO LOGISTICS GP, LLC, 

and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, 

 

Defendants.

JINETRA BONNER, individually, on behalf herself 

and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

TESORO REFINING & MARKETING 

COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability 

Company; and DOES 1 through 100 inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:17-cv-00123-JST

Assigned to the Hon. Jon S. Tigar

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: STIPULATION 

TO EXTEND CLASS CERTIFICATION 

MOTION DEADLINES 

Case No. 17-CV-03850-JST
1

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: STIPULATION TO EXTEND 

CLASS CERTIFICATION MOTION DEADLINES

Case Nos. 3:17-cv-00123-JST/17-CV-03850-JST

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

The Court, having considered the parties’ Stipulation to Extend Class Certification Motion 

Deadlines, and finding good cause appearing, hereby ORDERS that: 

1. Plaintiffs shall file their motion for class certification by November 26, 2018;

2. Defendants shall file their opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion by January 18, 2019; 

3. Plaintiffs shall file their reply by February 8, 2019; and

4. The hearing on Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification shall be continued to February 28, 

2019, at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: $XJXVW __________________________________________

Jon S. Tigar, United States District Judge
EXHIBIT 1

FILED UNDER SEAL
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 9, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-20478

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ADEBAYO MOHAMMED,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:04-CR-421-ALL

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

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Adebayo Mohammed

raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.

United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal

offense, by United States v. Stone, 306 F.3d 241, 243 (5th Cir.

2002), which held that no Sixth Amendment violation arises when a

district court considers the nature of a prior conviction rather

than presenting the question to a jury in sentencing the

defendant under the Armed Career Criminal Act, and by United
No. 05-20478

-2-

States v. Austin, 432 F.3d 598, 599-600 (5th Cir. 2005), which

held that the application of the remedial opinion of United

States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), to a sentencing hearing

where the underlying offense was committed pre-Booker did not

violate constitutional due process or ex post facto requirements. 

The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and

the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KAREN TOMLINSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00540-WHO 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL UPON 

SETTLEMENT

The parties to the action, by and through their counsel, have advised the Court that they have 

agreed to a settlement. 

IT IS ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and any hearings 

scheduled in this matter are VACATED. It is further ordered that if any party certifies to this Court, 

with proper notice to opposing counsel within sixty (60) days from the date below, that settlement has 

not in fact occurred, this order shall be vacated and this cause shall be restored to the calendar for 

further proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 28, 2017

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge
The STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Ray BRADLEY, Appellee.

No. 3D17-726

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed June 5, 2019

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Nikole Hiciano, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jonathan Greenberg, Assistant Public Defender, for appellee.

Holland & Knight and Frances Guasch De La Guardia; Miriam Ramos, City Attorney, for City of Coral Gables, as amicus curiae.

Before EMAS, C.J., and SALTER and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

*On Remand from the Supreme Court of Florida*

Upon consideration of the opinion of the Supreme Court issued May 3, 2019,1 quashing this Court's opinion of May 30, 2018, in this case,2 the Court withdraws its opinion of May 30, 2018, and substitutes the following opinion in its place and stead.

The circuit court order of March 17, 2017, granting defendant/appellee Ray Bradley's motion to vacate illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800, is hereby vacated. The case is remanded to the trial court for entry of an order denying Bradley's motion. *State v. Michel*, 257 So. 3d 3 (Fla. 2018) ; *Franklin v. State*, 258 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 2018).

Reversed and remanded.

1

*State v. Bradley*, No. SC18-922, 2019 WL 1983473 (Fla. May 3, 2019).

2

*State v. Bradley*, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D1213, 2018 WL 2422873 (Fla. 3d DCA May 30, 2018).
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
  1.
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.
 /s/ Erik OlssonErik OlssonPresident and
Chief Executive OfficerFebruary 10, 2011/s/ Patricia D. ChiodoPatricia D. ChiodoSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial OfficerFebruary 10, 2011
United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 19, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 05-40877

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

MARCUS TREMAIN ARNOLD,

Defendant - Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division

_________________________________________________________________

Before KING, GARWOOD and JOLLY, Circuit Judges.

E. GRADY JOLLY, Circuit Judge:

In a previous opinion in this case, after affirming Arnold’s

convictions, we ordered a limited remand to the district court with

respect to the enhancement of his sentence on Count One. United

States v. Arnold, 467 F.3d 880, 888 (5th Cir. 2006). We did so

because the record was inadequate to determine whether Arnold had

been prejudiced by the Government’s statutory citation error in its

pre-trial Sentencing Enhancement Notice, which reflected the

Government’s intention to seek a sentence of ten years to life.

Arnold went to trial and was convicted. After his conviction, the

Government corrected the citation error in an amended notice, which
1 Arnold was also sentenced to concurrent terms of 120 months

on Count Two and 60 months on Count Three. 

2

now reflected that the Government intended to seek a mandatory life

sentence on Count One.1 Id.

On remand, the district court, after holding a hearing, held

that, regardless of whether the burden was on Arnold to show he had

no pretrial notice of the Government’s intention to seek a

mandatory life sentence, or instead on the Government to show that

he did have such notice, it was clear that Arnold was not

adequately notified of the possibility of a mandatory life

sentence. Further, he had been prejudiced because “[w]ithout

notice that he would face a mandatory enhancement ... Arnold did

not have adequate information to decide whether to enter a plea or

go to trial. Therefore, Arnold’s substantive rights were

affected.” 

The case is now back before us. Based on the district court’s

finding of prejudice, the sentence imposed on Count One is VACATED

and the case is REMANDED for re-sentencing.

SENTENCE ON COUNT ONE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RE-SENTENCING.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 81 (Thursday, April 27, 1995)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 20762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10363]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-30,651]


Elbit Ft. Worth, Inc. (EFW, Inc.) Fort Worth, Texas; Dismissal of 
Application for Reconsideration

    Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18 an application for administration 
reconsideration was filed with the Director of the Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for workers at Elbit Ft. Worth, Inc. (EFW, Inc.) 
Fort Worth, Texas. The review indicated that the application contained 
no new substantial information which would bear importantly on the 
Department's determination. Therefore, dismissal of the application was 
issued.

TA-W-30,651; Elbit Ft. Worth, Inc. (EFW, Inc.)
    Fort Worth, Texas (April 12, 1995)

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 19th day of April, 1995.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-10363 Filed 4-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
EXHIBIT 32.2


                          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 AAA Energy, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended APRIL 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in
the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

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

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

Date:  June 13, 2008


/s/ Siu Man Kwan
------------------------------------
Siu Man Kwan
CFO and Principal Accounting Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 82 (Friday, April 28, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 20914]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10469]



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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 94-79; RM-8493]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Pine Hill, AL

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document allots FM Channel 244A to Pine Hill, Alabama, as 
that community's first local aural transmission service, in response to 
a petition for rule making filed by R. J. Miller. See 59 FR 35894, July 
14, 1994. Coordinates used for Channel 244A at Pine Hill are North 
Latitude 32-01-38 and West Longitude 87-37-23. With this action, the 
proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective June 8, 1995. The window period for filing 
applications for Channel 244A at Pine Hill, Alabama, will open on June 
8, 1995, and close on July 10, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180. Questions related to the window application filing process 
for Channel 244A at Pine Hill, Alabama, should be addressed to the 
Audio Services Division, FM Branch, (202) 418-2700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 94-79, adopted April 14, 1995, and 
released April 24, 1995. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, 
D.C. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractors, International Transcription Service, 
Inc., (202) 857-3800, located at 1919 M Street, NW, Room 246, or 2100 M 
Street, NW, Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, 
as amended.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments underAlabama, is 
amended by adding Pine Hill, Channel 244A.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 95-10469 Filed 4-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F