alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 26409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12130]



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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force


USAF Scientific Advisory Board Meeting

    The USAF Scientific Advisory Board's Science & Technology Review of 
Advanced Weapons will meet on 5-9 June 1995 at Kirtland AFB, NM from 
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    The purpose of the meeting is to fulfill the yearly SAB Science and 
Technology Review in the area of Advanced Weapons.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with Section 
552b of Title 5, United States Code, specifically subparagraphs (1) and 
(4) thereof.
    For further information, contact the Scientific Advisory Board 
Secretariat at (703) 697-8845.
Patsy J. Conner,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-12130 Filed 5-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3910-01-P
**EXHIBIT15**

 

LETTER FROM INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM REGARDING UNAUDITED INTERIM

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

 

LETTER IN LIEU OF CONSENT FOR REVIEW REPORT

 

Board of Directors and Shareholder

Boeing Capital Corporation

Seattle, Washington

 

We have made a review, in accordance withstandards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), ofthe unaudited interim financial information of Boeing Capital Corporation andsubsidiaries for the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2004and 2003, as indicated in our report dated October 27, 2004 (whichreport included an explanatory paragraph regarding a discontinued operation);because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on thatinformation.

 

We are aware that our report referred toabove, which is included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterended September 30, 2004, is incorporated by reference inRegistration Statement Numbers. 333-55846 and 333-83208 ofBoeing Capital Corporation on Form S-3.

 

We also are aware that the aforementionedreport, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, is notconsidered a part of the Registration Statement prepared or certified by anaccountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within themeaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

 

 
| /S/ Deloitte & Touche  LLP |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                           |
| Seattle, Washington            |
| October 27, 2004     |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-7701

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

JAMES JOSEPH OWENS, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Wilson. James C. Fox, Senior 

District Judge. (8:78-cr-00017-F-1) 

Submitted: January 30, 2009 Decided: February 24, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

James Joseph Owens, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

James Joseph Owens appeals the district court’s orders 

directing amendment of the presentence report and denying Owens’ 

motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Owens, 

No. 8:78-cr-00017-F-1 (E.D.N.C. June 26 & Aug. 7, 2008). 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
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, David Rickey, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Applied Micro Circuits Corporation; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial 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; 

 

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

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is beingprepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness ofthe registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c) disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or is likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officersand I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): 

 

a) all significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Joseph S. GONCALVES, petitioner, v. KENTUCKY.

No. 13-6967.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Kentucky denied.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Statements re computation of per share earnings             Exhibit 11 
(In Thousands Except for Per Share Data)
                                                    Nine months ended
                                                      September 30,
                                                  ---------------------
                                                     1997        1996
                                                  ---------   ---------
<S>                                               <C>         <C>
PRIMARY NET INCOME PER SHARE
Weighted average common stock outstanding            9,491       9,392

Common equivalent shares for stock options using
    the treasury stock method                          225          93
                                                  ---------   ---------
Weighted average shares outstanding                  9,716       9,484
                                                  =========   =========
Net income                                         $13,447     $11,502
                                                  =========   =========
Primary net income per share                         $1.38       $1.21
                                                  =========   =========

FULLY DILUTED NET INCOME PER SHARE
Weighted average common stock outstanding            9,491       9,392

Common equivalent shares for stock options using
    the treasury stock method                          378          97
                                                  ---------   ---------
Weighted average shares outstanding                  9,869       9,488
                                                  =========   =========
Net income                                         $13,447     $11,502
                                                  =========   =========
Fully diluted net income per share                   $1.36       $1.21
                                                  =========   =========

</TABLE>
All share and per share information has been adjusted for the 3% stock
dividend declared in November 1996.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

COMMERCIAL WATER AND MOLD, LLC, a/a/o FLORENCE BELL
, Appellant,

v.

SAFEPOINT INSURANCE COMPANY
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 2 1

- 274

[ July 29, 2021 ]

Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Robert W. Lee , Judge; L.T. Case No s. COCE17

- 23681

and CACE20

- 8162.

Asher Perlin of Law Office of Asher Perlin

, Hollywood, for appellant.

Patrick M. Chidnese of Bickford & Chidnese, LLP

, Tampa, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

C IKLIN
, G ERBER and F ORST

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
1

07- 0141- cv S h a d y G r o v e O r th o p e d ic A ss o c s. v . A llsta te In su r a n c e C o . UN ITED STA

TES CO URT OF AP P EALS F OR TH E S ECO N D CI RCU IT 

## SUMMA RY ORDER Rulings by summ ary ord er do no t have precedent ial effect. Citatio n to sum mary or ders filed on or

after January 1, 2007, is permit ted and is governed by F ederal Rule of Appellate Pr ocedure 32.1 and thi s court’s Local Rule 32.1 .1. When citing a summ ary ord er in a docu ment file d wit h t hi s co ur t, a p ar ty m us t c it e ei th er

th e F ed er al

App en di x o r

anel ect r on ic da ta ba se (withthe not ation “sum mary or der”) . A party citin g a summar y order must serve a copy of it on any part

y not r epresented by cou nsel.
At a stated term

of the Un ited Stat es Court of Appeals for t he Second Circuit , held at th e Daniel Pat rick Moynihan Un ited Stat es Courthouse, 500 Pearl St reet, in t he City of New York, on the n inth d ay of June, two thou sand and ten.
PR E SE NT: J OS É A. C AB R ANES , R OS EMARY S. P OO L ER , R O BERT A. K

A T ZMA NN , Circuit Jud ges .

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x S HADY G R OVE O RT HO PEDI C A S S OCI AT ES , P.A., on beha lf of it s elf andall other s s imila rly s ituat ed,
Pl aint iff -A ppella nt , S O NI A E. GAL VE Z ,

Pl aint iff , -v .- No . 07 -0 141 -c v A L L S T AT E I NS UR ANC E C OMP A NY ,

Defenda nt-App ellee

.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x F OR P LAIN TIF F

- AP P ELLAN T: J OHN S. S PA DARO , J oh n S hee han Sp adar o, LL C, H ock es s in , D E.2

F OR DE F EN DAN T- AP P ELLEE : A ND R E W T. H AHN , S R ., Sey farth Sh aw L

LP , N ew Yo r k, N Y. Onr ema ndfr omth e Supr eme Cou r t o f the U ni te d S tat es . UPON DUE CONSIDERAT ION, IT IS HEREB Y ORDERED, A DJUDGED, AND DE CRE ED th at the j ud gm ent be VAC ATED andth e cau s e be REMAN DE D to th e Unit ed S tat es Distr ict Court for the Eastern Dis trict of New York for f urther pr ocee dings consist ent with the opinion of th e Supr eme Cou r t o f the U ni te d S tat es . After our decision in Shad

y Gro ve Orthopedic Assoc

s., P.A. v. Allstate Ins. Co. , 549 F.3d 137 (2008), plaintiffs Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A., petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of cer ti or ar i. T he S up r eme Cou r t g

r ant ed the wr

it of cer ti or ar i an d thenr ever s ed the d ecis io n o f thi s Cou r t. See

556 U.S . —

, 20 10 WL

122 227 2 (

201 0)

. We no w VACAT E th e ju dgm ent of th e Di s tr ict Cou r t an d REM

AND fo r fu r th er pr oce edi ngs con s is te nt with the o pi ni onof

th e Supr eme Cou r t. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

FOR THE C OU R

T, Ca therine O’Haga n Wolfe, C lerk of Court
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

ROBERT HOLLAND, )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 2:13-CV-491-RL-JEM

)

CERBERUS CAPITAL )

MANAGEMENT LP, et al., )

Defendants. )

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on a Request for an Extension of Time to Respond to the

Motion to Dismiss [DE 44], filed by Plaintiff Robert Holland, pro se, on June 25, 2014. Plaintiff

Holland requests an extension of time through July 20, 2014, within which to respond to the Motion

to Dismiss filed by Defendants Cerberus Capital Management, LP, Stephen Feinberg, and Robert

Nardelli (the “Cerberus Defendants”). Plaintiff Holland represents that counsel for the Cerberus

Defendants does not object to the requested extension.

Finding the Motion well taken, the Court hereby GRANTS the Request for an Extension

of Time to Respond to the Motion to Dismiss [DE 44] and ORDERS that Plaintiff Holland has an

extension through July 20, 2014, within which to respond to the pending Motion to Dismiss.

 SO ORDERED this 30th day of June, 2014.

s/ John E. Martin 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN E. MARTIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

cc: All counsel of record

Plaintiff, pro se

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 52 filed 06/30/14 page 1 of 1
Roger C. CASSIDY, petitioner, v. Michael D. CREWS, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 12-5747.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Order entered November 24, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00353-CV

MRC PERMIAN COMPANY AND JOE FORAN, Appellants

V.

THREE RIVERS OPERATING COMPANY AND THREE RIVERS ACQUISITION 

LLC, Appellees

On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-12637-A

ORDER

We GRANT appellants’ November 20, 2014 unopposed motion for extension of time to 

file reply brief and ORDER the brief be filed no later than January 2, 2015.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 98 (Monday, May 22, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 27151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12611]



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


Commodity Futures Trading Commission

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, June 9, 1995.

PLACE: 2033 K St., NW., Washington, DC, 8th Floor Hearing Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-254-6314.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 95-12611 Filed 5-18-95; 3:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 97 (Friday, May 19, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 26877]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12354]



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


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Meeting of the Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed 
Forces

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Commission on Roles and Missions of the 
Armed Forces.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of a forthcoming meeting of the 
Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces.
    The Commission will meet in open session from 2:00 p.m. until 4:00 
p.m. The purpose of the meeting will be to conduct a press conference 
to publicly announce the Commission's recommendations and findings.

DATES: May 24, 1995, 2:00 p.m. until 4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Willard Inter-Continental Hotel, Franklin Pierce Room, 1401 
Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commander Gregg Hartung, Director for 
Public Affairs, Commission on Roles and Missions, 1100 Wilson 
Boulevard, Suite 1200F, Arlington, Virginia 22209; telephone (703) 696-
4250.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Extraordinary circumstances created by 
coordination difficulties compel notice of this meeting to be posted in 
less than the 15-day requirement.

    Dated: May 15, 1995.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 95-12354 Filed 5-18-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
**[Virchow Krause & Company Logo]****Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**We have examined WestLake Settlement Services, LLC's compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB applicable to WestLake (the "Applicable Servicing Criteria") as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007: 1122(d)(4)(xi) Payments made on behalf of an obligor (such as tax or insurance payments) are made on or before the related penalty or expiration dates, as indicated on the appropriate bills or notices for such payments, provided that such support has been received by the servicer at least 30 calendar days prior to these dates, or such other number of days specified in the transaction agreements.; 1122(d)(4)(xii) Any late payment penalties in connection with any payment to be made on behalf of an obligor are paid from the servicer's funds and not charged to the obligor, unless the late payment was due to the obligor's error or omission; Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with these servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. In our opinion, WestLake Settlement Services, LLC complied with, in all material respects, the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007. /s/ Virchow Krause & Company LLP****Virchow Krause & Company, LLP March 3, 2008
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 1 of 9
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 2 of 9
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 3 of 9
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 4 of 9
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 5 of 9
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 6 of 9
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 7 of 9
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 8 of 9
USDC IN/ND case 2:12-cv-00056-JTM-APR document 1 filed 02/03/12 page 9 of 9
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 27557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12676]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Financial Services Technology Consortium, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on January 18, 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''), Financial Services 
Technology Consortium, Inc. (the ``Consortium'') has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. The following parties were 
admitted as Associate Members of the Consortium: R.D.M. Corporation, 
Ontario, CANADA; National Semiconductor Corporation, Sunnyvale, CA; 
Equifax Credit Information Services, Atlanta, GA; and Lifecycle 
Technology, Fairfax, VA. The following party was admitted as an 
Advisory Member of the Consortium: Electronic Check Clearing House 
Organization, Dallas, TX.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the Consortium. Membership remains open, and the Consortium 
intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes 
in membership.
    On October 21, 1993, the Consortium filed its original notification 
pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of 
the Act on December 14, 1993 (58 FR 65399).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on December 21, 
1994. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
section 6(b) of the Act on April 13, 1995 (60 FR 18857).
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-12676 Filed 5-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
In re Alfred C. PUCCI, petitioner.

No. 12-9218.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.
Phillip G. MARTINEZ, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 13-6212.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 12, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Eleventh District, denied.