alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 25930]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11881]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration


Notice of a Change in Status of an Extended Benefit (EB) Period 
for the State of Rhode Island

    This notice announces a change in benefit period eligibility under 
the EB Program for the State of Rhode Island.

Summary

    The following change has occurred since the publication of the last 
notice regarding States' EB status:
    <bullet> April 9, 1995--Rhode Island's 13-week insured unemployment 
rate for the week ending March 25, 1995 rose above 6.0 percent, causing 
the State to trigger ``on'' EB effective April 9, 1995.

Information for Claimants

    The duration of benefits payable in the EB Program, and the terms 
and conditions on which they are payable, are governed by the Federal-
State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970, as amended, and 
the operating instructions issued to the States by the U.S. Department 
of Labor. In the case of a State beginning an EB period, the State 
employment security agency will furnish a written notice of potential 
entitlement to each individual who has exhausted all rights to regular 
benefits and is potentially eligible for extended benefits (20 CFR 
615.13(c)(1)).
    Persons who believe they may be entitled to EB benefits, or who 
wish to inquire about the rights under the programs, should contact the 
nearest State employment service office or unemployment compensation 
claims office in their locality.

    Signed at Washington, D.C., on May 8, 1995.
Doug Ross,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training.
[FR Doc. 95-11881 Filed 5-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
Michael WOODMORE, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 12-9344.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, denied.
Darnelld Rebeca COLMAN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-10242.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial data extracted from the Company's
consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended June 30, 2000 included
in Part I Financial information and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           8,956
<SECURITIES>                                     7,607
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,930
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,470
<PP&E>                                          43,485
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,561
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  57,394
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,479
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,752
<OTHER-SE>                                      46,163
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    57,394
<SALES>                                          4,945
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,132
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,178
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   174
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,024
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,024
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,024
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15



</TABLE>
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 19

- 41000 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,** Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Marvin Abel Lopez**

**- Villanueva,**  Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:19

- CR

- 686

- 1

Before **King, Southwick,** and **Ho,** Circuit Judges

**. Per**  **Curiam :**  *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Marvin Abel Lopez

- Villanueva has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Lopez

- Villanueva has not filed a

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 9, 2021 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-41000 Document: 00515932184 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/09/2021No. 19

- 41000

2 response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue f or appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the **APPEAL IS DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 19-41000 Document: 00515932184 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/09/2021
Kathryn SWIFT, petitioner, v. Nancy MALACK, et al.

No. 12-9280.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Middle District, denied.
Case 3:17-cr-00093-WHA Document 9 Filed 12/29/16 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1

** **

** **

**Certification of CEO and CFO**

**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 on Form 10-Q of Angeles Income Properties, Ltd. II (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Steven D. Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership, each 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 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; and

 

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

 

 
|   |      /s/Steven D. Cordes  |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name: Steven D. Cordes                             |
|   | Date: August 13, 2009                              |
|   |                                               |
|   |      /s/Stephen B. Waters |
|   | Name: Stephen B. Waters                            |
|   | Date: August 13, 2009                              |

 

 

This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Joshua Eugene ROBINSON, petitioner, v. Michael D. CREWS, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

No. 12-9379.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                      Exhibit 12


                          TEXTRON FINANCIAL CORPORATION
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                    MARCH 31, 2005
                                                                  ------------------
<S>                                                               <C>
Income before income taxes ....................................     $         33
                                                                    ------------

FIXED CHARGES:

Interest on debt ..............................................               45
Estimated interest portion of rents ...........................                1
                                                                    ------------
Total fixed charges ...........................................               46
                                                                    ------------
Adjusted income ...............................................               79

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (1) ........................            1.71x
                                                                    ============
</TABLE>

(1)   The ratio of earnings to fixed charges has been computed by dividing
      income before income taxes and fixed charges by fixed charges. Fixed
      charges consist of interest on debt and one-third rental expense as
      representative of interest portion of rentals.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 3:13-CR-2 RM 

)

LAEF WADE )

ORDER

No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s findings and

recommendations upon a plea of guilty issued on January 16, 2013. Accordingly,

the court ADOPTS those findings and recommendations [docket # 8], ACCEPTS

defendant Laef Wade’s plea of guilty, and FINDS the defendant guilty of Count 1

of the Information, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b). 

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: February 5, 2013 

 /s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr. 

Judge, United States District Court

Northern District of Indiana
exhibit_10i6.htm


    
Exhibit
10(i)6

     

    ALLETE 2008 Form 10-K

    
 

    AMENDMENT
TO

    THE
ALLETE AND AFFILIATED COMPANIES

    SUPPLEMENTAL
EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN II

    


    


    The
ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan II,
effective January 1, 2009, is amended as follows:

    


    1.           Effective
January 20, 2009, Section 5.1 is amended to read in its entirety as
follows:

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              5.1

            	
              Eligibility. An Employee who:
      (i) was a Participant as of September 30, 2006, (ii) has continuously
      remained an Employee in ALLETE management salary grade SA-SM, and (iii)
      has continuously participated in the ALLETE Executive Annual Incentive
      Plan or been eligible to receive a Bonus shall be eligible to receive an
      Annual Make-up Award.  Any other Employee shall be eligible to
      receive an Annual Make-up Award if the Employee: (i) initially becomes, or
      again becomes, a Participant after September 30, 2006, (ii) is in ALLETE
      management salary grade SG-SM, and (iii) participates in the ALLETE
      Executive Annual Incentive Plan or is eligible to receive a
      Bonus.

            


    

     

    


    


    


    ALLETE,
Inc.

    


    


    


    By:  Donald J.
Shippar                                                                    

    Donald J. Shippar

    Chairman, President & Chief
Executive Officer

    


    ATTEST:

    


    


    


    By:  Deborah A.
Amberg                                                                    

    Deborah A. Amberg

    Senior Vice
President,

    General Counsel &
Secretary
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 Annual Report of Asia Network, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the "Report"), I, Nelson Liao, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

> 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's
> financial position and results of operations.

/s/Nelson Liao



Nelson Liao, Chief Financial Officer

March 7, 2006
Amendment to Employment Contract of CFO



 Exhibit 10.9 
  
 Allegheny Energy Service Corporation 
 800 Cabin
Hill Drive 
 Greensburg, PA 15601 
  
 February 18, 2004 
  
 Jeffrey Serkes 
 c/o Allegheny Energy, Inc. 
 800 Cabin Hill Drive 
 Greensburg, PA 15601 
  
 Dear Jeff: 
  
 You and Allegheny Energy Service Corporation (“AESC”) for itself and as agent for its parent, Allegheny Energy, Inc. (“AEI”), the
affiliates and subsidiaries of AESC and AEI, and any successors or assigns of any of the foregoing, entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of July 3, 2003. Pursuant to Section 5(a)(i) of the Agreement, you were
entitled to receive a grant of stock options for 550,000 shares of AEI Common Stock under the AEI Long-Term Incentive Plan on January 2, 2004, or an alternative adjustment to your compensation of equivalent value and opportunity if authorization of
such stock options was not obtained under the Public Utilities Holding Company Act of 1935 (“PUHCA”) by such date. As you are aware, authorization of your stock option award under PUHCA was not obtained until February 10, 2004. 

 
 Accordingly, you, AESC and AEI hereby agree that the Agreement is hereby
amended as follows: 
  
 1. Amendment to Section 5(a)(i) of the
Agreement. Section 5(a)(i) of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: 
  
 “(i) Option Grant. On the fifth business day following the date that AESC obtains authorization under the Public
Utilities Holding Company Act of 1935 (the “Authorization Date”), AESC shall grant the Executive stock options (the “Options”) for 550,000 shares of AEI Common Stock under the Allegheny Energy, Inc. 1998 Long-Term
Incentive Plan (the “LTIP”) at a per share exercise price equal to the per share closing price of AEI Common Stock on the date of grant, as quoted in the NYSE Composite Transaction Listing in The Wall Street Journal. Such
grant shall be evidenced by an award agreement substantially in the form of Exhibit A.” 
  
 2. Amendments to Section 5 (c)(i) of the Agreement. The references to January 2, 2004 in clauses (1) and (2) of Section 5(c)(i) of the Agreement are hereby amended to refer to the Authorization Date and the
2004 Closing Price is defined to mean the per share closing price of AEI Common Stock on the Authorization Date as quoted in the NYSE Composite Transaction listing in The Wall Street Journal. 
  










 Mr. Jeffrey Serkes 
 January 18, 2004 
 Page 2 
  

 Except as specifically amended hereby, all of the terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain
unchanged and are hereby ratified and confirmed. Please signify your agreement with the foregoing by signing the attached copy of this letter in the place indicated. 
  

			
	Very truly yours,
	
	Allegheny Energy Service Corporation
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Paul J. Evanson

	 	 	

	 	 	 Paul J. Evanson

	 	 	 Chairman, President, and
 Chief Executive Officer

	
	Allegheny Energy, Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Paul J. Evanson

	 	 	

	 	 	 Paul J. Evanson

	 	 	 Chairman, President, and
 Chief Executive Officer



  

	
	AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
	
	 /s/ Jeffrey Serkes

	

	 Jeffrey Serkes
Milta D. BLANCHARD, petitioner, v. D.R. STEPHENS, Warden.

No. 12-7894.

Supreme Court of the United States

July 22, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-40721 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JESUS JOSÉ ESCOBAR, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC Nos. C-00-CV-10 & C-96-CR-84-1

- - - - - - - - - - April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jesus José Escobar, a federal prisoner, appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as time-barred by 28 U.S.C. § 2255's one-year statute of limitations. We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties, and we ascertain no reversible error. Escobar’s conviction became final on October 5, 1998, the date on which the Supreme Court denied his petition for a writ of certiorari. See United States v. Thomas , 203 F.3d 350, 356 (5thNo. 00-40721 -2- Cir. 2000). Because Escobar filed his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion more than one year after this date, the district court did not err by dismissing it as time-barred. See id. ; 28 U.S.C. § 2255(1). Escobar’s assertion that the district court’s application of Thomas amounted to a violation of Teague v. Lane , 489 U.S. 288 (1989), is meritless because Thomas merely construed the limitations aspect of 28 U.S.C. § 2255; it did not announce a new rule of constitutional law. Nor has Escobar established rare and exceptional circumstances that would entitle him to equitable tolling of the limitations period. See Davis v. Johnson , 158 F.3d 806, 811 (5th Cir. 1998). The district court’s judgment of dismissal is AFFIRMED.
Donshea SAINT LOUIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2352

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed July 12, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
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 

# Order

March 27, 2013

146386

- 7 & (55)(59)

____________________________________

In re APPLICATION OF INTERNATIONAL

TRANSMISSION COMPANY FOR

EXPEDITED SITING CERTIFICATE

____________________________________

ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESSES

ADVOCATING TARIFF EQUITY,

Appellee,

v SC: 146386

COA: 303009

Public Service Commission:

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE 00

- 016200

COMMISSION,

Appellee,

and

INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION

COMPANY, d/b/a ITC TRANSMISSION,

Petitioner

- Appellee/

Cross

- Appellant,

and

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY,

Appellee,

and

MICHIGAN PUBLIC POWER AGENCY,

and MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC

ASSOCIATION,

Appellants/Cross

- Appellees.

____________________________________/

MICHIGAN PUBLIC POWER AGENCY

and MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC

ASSOCIATION,

Appellants/Cross

- Appellees,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 March 27, 2013

h0320 2

SC: 146387

v COA: 303040

Public Service Commission:

00

- 016200

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE

COMMISSION,

Appellee,

and

INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION

COMPANY, d/b/a ITC TRANSMISSION,

Petitioner

- Appellee/

Cross

- Appellant,

and

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY and

ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESSES

ADVOCATING TARIFF EQUITY,

Appellees.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the joint motion for immediate consideration is

GRANTED. The application fo r leave to appeal the November 6, 2012 judgment of the

Court of Appeals and the application for leave to appeal as cross

- appellant are considered

and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE, in

part, the judgment of th e Court of Appeals. The Michigan Public Service Commission

correctly determined that issuance of an expedited siting certificate under 2008 PA 295

carries with it authorization to construct the transmission line that is the subject of the

certificate. Th e Court of Appeals clearly erred in determining that Const 1963, art 4, § 25

would be violated if 2008 PA 295 authorizes such construction because 2008 PA 295 was

enacted without re

- enacting and publishing 1995 PA 30, which generally governs

construction o f electric transmission lines. 2008 PA 295, and particularly Part 4 of the

act, provides a comprehensive legislative scheme for issuing expedited siting certificates,

and clearly intends construction of approved transmission lines. Because 2008 PA 295 is

an act complete in itself, Const 1963, art 4, § 25 is not violated. See Alan v Wayne

County, 388 Mich 210

, 276

- 277 (1972), and People v Mahaney, 13 Mich 481, 496

- 497

(1865). In all other respects, the applications are DENIED, because we are not persuade d

that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.