alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Pete L. BOYETTE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1650

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 3, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21790-21791]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10907]



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



DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Agency Form Under Review by the Office of Management and Budget

    DOC has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for 
clearance the following proposal for collection of information under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

Agency: Bureau of the Census.
Title: MAF and TIGER Linkage Activities.
Form Number(s): Will vary by activity.
Agency Approval Number: None.
Type of Request: New collection.
Burden: 1,195 hours.
Number of Respondents: 32,103.
Avg Hours Per Response: Two and one half minutes. [[Page 21791]] 
Needs and Uses: The Census Bureau requests OMB approval for a generic 
clearance to undertake a number of activities it plans to conduct to 
create and update its Master Address File (MAF) and maintain the 
linkage between the MAF and the Topologically Integrated Geographic 
Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) data base of address ranges and 
associated geographic information. These activities will be conducted 
on a schedule to support preparations for the 2000 decennial census, 
but also will support the address matching and geocoding requirements 
of the proposed Continuous Measurement program, the population 
estimates program, the economic and agriculture censuses, and the 
current demographic surveys. This clearance will allow the Census 
Bureau to focus its limited resources on operational planning and 
procedural development activities. The activities to be conducted under 
this clearance are: Listing, Update/Leave, MAF Reconciliation, 
Canvassing, Block Splits, Field Verification, Master Address File 
Quality Improvement Program (MAF QIP), the Address List Availability 
Survey (ALAS), and the Rural Address Reference Availability Survey 
(RARAS). The Census Bureau has conducted each category of activity (or 
similar ones) previously and the burden remains relatively unchanged 
from one time to another.
Affected Public: Individuals or households.
Frequency: One-time.
Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
OMB Desk Officer: Maria Gonzalez, (202) 395-7313.

    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Gerald Tache, DOC Forms Clearance Officer, (202) 
482-3271, Department of Commerce, room 5312, 14th and Constitution 
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Maria Gonzalez, OMB Desk Officer, room 
10201, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

    Dated: April 27, 1995.
Gerald Tache,
Departmental Forms Clearance Officer, Office of Management and 
Organization.
[FR Doc. 95-10907 Filed 5-2-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-F
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 9, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Pages 24673-24674]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11441]



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


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, that the Securities and 
Exchange Commission will hold the following meetings during the week of 
May 8, 1995.
    A closed meeting will be held on Tuesday, May 9, 1995, at 10:00 
a.m. An open meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 10, 1995, at 10:00 
a.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the 
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. 
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be 
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552(c)(4), (8), (9)(A) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(4), 
(8), (9)(i) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at 
a closed meeting.
    Commissioner Roberts, as duty officer, voted to consider the items 
listed for the closed meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the closed meeting scheduled for Tuesday, May 
9, 1995, at 10:00 a.m., will be:

    Institution of injunctive actions.
    Institution of administrative proceedings of an enforcement 
nature.
    Settlement of injunctive actions.
    Settlement of administrative proceedings of an enforcement 
nature.
    Opinion.

    The subject matter of the open meeting scheduled for Wednesday, May 
10, 1995, at 10:00 a.m., will be:

    Consideration of whether to adopt: (i) Rule 434 and amendments 
to existing rules and forms under the Securities Act of 1933, the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 
1940 in order to facilitate prospectus delivery under the T+3 
securities transaction settlement cycle effective June 7, 1995 and 
otherwise streamline the registration process; (ii) amendments to 
Rule 15c6-1 under the Exchange Act with respect to settlement of 
firm commitment underwritten offerings; and (iii) revisions to Rule 
15c2-8 under the Exchange Act to reflect the provisions of Rule 434 
and new means of disseminating prospectus information. For further 
information, contact Anita Klein or Joseph Babits at (202) 942-
2900. [[Page 24674]] 
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alternations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact: The Office of the Secretary (202) 942-7070.

    Dated: May 4, 1995.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11441 Filed 5-5-95; 9:50 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

           CERTIFICATION OF THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
      AND CORPORATE VICE PRESIDENT -- FINANCE AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned
President and Chief Executive Officer, and Corporate Vice President -- Finance
and Chief Financial Officer of Neenah Foundry Company (the "Company"), hereby
certify, based on our knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the
Company for the year ended September 30, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

                                                /s/ WILLIAM M. BARRETT
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                    William M. Barrett
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer

                                                  /s/ GARY W. LACHEY
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                      Gary W. LaChey
                                           Corporate Vice President -- Finance

Date: December 23, 2004
Roy Stethen PORTER, petitioner, v. WASHINGTON.

No. 12-9556.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1, denied.
Anesthesiology and Respiratory Therapy Devices 

Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee 

Link for Audience/Viewers 

February 2, 2024 - WebCast Link 

YouTube: 

https://youtube.com/live/PoYhjFgscjg 

Please log on 20 minutes before the webcast to test your signal. 

You may have to refresh your browser before logging on.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 24963]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11486]



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



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Civil Tiltrotor Development Advisory Committee, Economics 
Subcommittee

    Pursuant to section 10(A)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
Public Law (72-362); 5 U.S.C. (App. I), notice is hereby given of a 
meeting of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) sponsored Civil 
Tiltrotor Development Advisory Committee (CTRDAC) Economics 
Subcommittee that will be held on May 31, 1995 in Philadelphia, PA at 
the Philadelphia International Airport in the Tour Room located on the 
Concourse between Terminals C and D.
    The meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. and conclude by 4:00 p.m.
    The agenda for the Economics Subcommittee meeting will include the 
following:
    (1) Review and discussion on the draft economics report.
    (2) Review of schedule and work plans.
    (3) Other business.
    Persons who plan to attend the meeting should notify Ms. Karen 
Braxton on 202-267-9451 by May 24. Attendance is open to the interested 
public, but limited to space available. With the approval of the 
Chairperson, members of the public may present oral statements at the 
meeting.
    Members of the public may provide a written statement to the 
Subcommittee at any time.
    Persons with a disability requiring special services, such as an 
interpreter for the hearing impaired, should contact Ms. Karen Braxton 
at least seven working days prior to the meeting.

    Issued in Washington, DC, May 3, 1995.
Richard A. Weiss,
Designated Federal Official, Civil Tiltrotor Development Advisory 
Committee.
[FR Doc. 95-11486 Filed 5-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### Wilbur WEEKS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel SENKOWSKI, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 03-2501.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 20, 2004.

Susan D. Fitzpatrick, Ossining, NY, for Appellant.

Ann Bordley, Assistant District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, and Leonard Joblove and Victor Barall, Jr., Assistant District Attorneys), for Appellee, of counsel.

Present: JACOBS, STRAUB, and WESLEY, Circuit Judges.

*SUMMARY ORDER*

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Wilbur Weeks appeals from a judgment and order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Weinstein, J.), asserting, *inter alia,*that his counsel’s failure to pursue an alibi defense constituted ineffective assistance. The district court rejected this claim as procedurally barred. [A 18-19.] Alternatively, the district court ruled that the claim is meritless. [A 19-20.] Nonetheless, it granted Weeks a certificate of appealability on this claim. [A 22.] Familiarity is assumed as to the facts, the procedural context, and the specification of appellate issues.

This Court “review[s] a district court’s denial of a habeas petition *de novo.*” *Aparicio v. Artuz,*269 F.3d 78, 89 (2d Cir .2001).

Though Weeks raised his ineffective assistance claim in a motion to vacate, he never sought leave to appeal the trial court’s denial. The district court therefore properly concluded that Weeks did not exhaust his state remedies. It is possible that Weeks’s claim was not procedurally barred, but we need not reach that question.

Denial “on the merits” is permissible “notwithstanding the failure of the applicant to exhaust the remedies available in the courts of the State.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(2). We have reviewed the record *de novo*and affirm because Week’s claim is meritless. The affidavits of Weeks and Robert Brodie do not establish that Weeks’s trial counsel provided anything other than competent representation — let alone that Weeks was prejudiced by his trial counsel’s failure to present an alibi defense.

Before oral argument, Weeks moved for discovery and enlargement of the record. As directed by this Court at argument, the government subsequently located and produced the transcription of Brodie’s pretrial statement to the authorities. The motion to enlarge the record is therefore granted. Our review of the Brodie transcript reinforces the conclusion that Weeks’s alibi argument is baseless.

*788For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information   extracted  from  the
registrant's  financial  statements  as of and for the three month  period ended
June 28, 1997,  and is qualifed in its  entirety by reference to such  financial
statements:
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-28-1997
<CASH>                                           1,256,156
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                      2,904,024
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,295,538
<PP&E>                                           3,918,979
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,523,694
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   5,850,069
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,083,362
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                        500,000
<COMMON>                                           548,892
<OTHER-SE>                                        (374,536)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5,850,069
<SALES>                                          4,124,351
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,124,351
<CGS>                                            2,553,090
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,553,090
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,693,710
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  60,651
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (224,557)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (224,557)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (224,557)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.01)
        


</TABLE>
Paul Andre BLANTON, petitioner, v. Patricia L. CARUSO, et al.

No. 12-8707.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Eric Jay MINOR, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9349.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
ex10_1.htm

EXHIBIT 10.1

    AMENDMENT
TWO TO NONQUALIFIED

    STOCK
OPTION AGREEMENT

     

     

    THIS
AMENDMENT TWO TO NONQUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT is effective as of January
20, 2009, between Celanese Corporation (the "Company") and ___________ (the
"Participant").

     

     

    R E C I T
A L S:

     

    WHEREAS,
the Company and the Participant have entered into a Nonqualified Stock Option
Agreement, effective as of January 21, 2005, as amended effective April 2, 2007
(collectively, the "Agreement"), pursuant to which the Participant was granted
an Option pursuant to the Celanese Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan, as
from time to time amended (the “Plan”); and

    


    WHEREAS,
the Committee has determined that it would be in the best interests of the
Company and its stockholders for the Agreement to be amended as set forth
below.

     

    NOW,
THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

     

    1. Definitions.  Capitalized
terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such
terms in the Agreement or the Plan, as the case may be.

     

    2. Amendment to
Agreement.

     

    The
following new language is added to Section 4(a) of the Agreement immediately
following Section 4(a)(iii) of the Agreement:

     

    Notwithstanding
the foregoing, and at all times subject to Section 4(a)(iii) above, if the
Participant's Employment continues through April 1, 2012, the Participant
may exercise the Vested Portion of an Option at any time prior to the Expiration
Date; and

     

    3. Agreement Remains In
Effect.  Except as
modified hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.

     

     

    *   *   *   *   *

     


    
      
         


      

      
         


        
          

        

      

      
         


      

    


     

    IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment Two has been executed and delivered by the
parties hereto.

     

    
      	
            	 
                    
              CELANESE
      CORPORATION

              By:
      ________________________

               

              Title:
      _______________________

            
	
            	 
                    
              Agreed
      to this ____ day of __________, 2009

              ________________________________

              Participant
# United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 February 28, 2006 Before Hon. FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge No. 04-2142 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee , v. MAMOUN ALI ARMAN, Defendant-Appellant

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 02 CR 1085 Joan Humphrey Lefkow, Judge

. O R D E R This court ordered a limited remand so the district court could state on the record whether the sentence remains appropriate now that United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), has limited the guidelines to advisory status. See United States v. Paladino , 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir. 2005). The district judge has now replied with specificity that she would not have imposed the same sentence on Arman at the time of his original sentencing had she known that the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory and not binding. The defendant did not respond to our invitation to file an argument concerning the appropriate disposition of the appeal in light of the district court’s response; however, the United States agrees that the sentence should be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing. Accordingly, we VACATE Arman’s sentence and REMAND to the district court for resentencing. UNPUBLISHED ORDER Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24633-24634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11348]



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


FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

First National Corporation, et al.; Formations of; Acquisitions 
by; and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied for the Board's 
approval under section 3 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 
1842) and Sec.  225.14 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.14) to 
become a bank holding company or to acquire a bank or bank holding 
company. The factors that are considered in acting on the applications 
are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
    Each application is available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. Once the application has been accepted 
for processing, it will also be available for inspection at the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views 
in writing to the Reserve Bank or to the offices of the Board of 
Governors. Any comment on an application that requests a hearing must 
include a statement of why a written presentation would not suffice in 
lieu of a hearing, identifying specifically any questions of fact that 
are in dispute and summarizing the evidence that would be presented at 
a hearing.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received not later than June 2, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Zane R. Kelley, Vice President) 
104 Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303:
    1. First National Corporation, Folkston, Georgia; to become a bank 
holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of First 
National Bank, Folkston, Georgia, in organization.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Randall C. Sumner, Vice 
President) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166:
    1. Central Bancompany, Inc., Jefferson City, Missouri; to acquire 
100 percent of the voting shares of Jeffries Insurance Agency, Inc., 
Buckner, Missouri, and thereby indirectly acquire at least 80 of the 
voting shares of First State Bank of Missouri, Buckner, Missouri.

    [[Page 24634]] Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 
May 3, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-11348 Filed 5-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
# L_2017251EN.01002902.xml

| 29.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 251/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 251/29

---

Corrigendum to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1568 of 15 September 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 238 of 16 September 2017
  )

On page 11, in the Annex, point (a) ‘Natural Persons’, entry 63:

for:

‘Pak Yon Sik’,

read:

‘Pak Yong Sik’.

---
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER OF REFERRAL TO

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

This case is referred to the United States Attorney for investigation of possible theft of

trade secrets based on the evidentiary record supplied thus far concerning plaintiff Waymo

LLC’s claims for trade secret misappropriation. Said evidentiary record is described in detail in

the Court’s order, also issued today, on Waymo’s motion for provisional relief. The Court takes

no position on whether a prosecution is or is not warranted, a decision entirely up to the United

States Attorney. The Clerk shall please send a copy of this order to the United States Attorney.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 11, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 428 Filed 05/11/17 Page 1 of 1
Estanislao M. GARCIA, III, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4207

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 05, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.