alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4569-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for State of California (FEMA-4569-DR), dated October 16, 2020, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This change occurred on May 14, 2021.

      ( print page 35105)    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Andrew Grant, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Willie G. Nunn as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2021-14084 Filed 6-30-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00586-CV

Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity, Province Sigma Council of

Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity, James Balandrán, Michael Sophir,

Clark Brown, and John Kovalan, Appellants

v.

Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Texas Rho Corporation and

Sigma Alpha Epsilon Texas Rho House Corporation, Appellees

FROM THE 261ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. D-1-GN-18-001839, THE HONORABLE LORA J. LIVINGSTON, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N 

The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss this appeal. We grant the motion 

and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2).

__________________________________________

Thomas J. Baker, Justice

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Triana

Dismissed on Joint Motion

Filed: February 6, 2019
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7907
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PERCY JOE FISHER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Salisbury. William L. Osteen, Senior District Judge. (4:94-cr-00137-WLO; 4:96-cv-00905-WLO) Submitted: May 31, 2007 Decided: June 5, 2007 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Percy Joe Fisher, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Percy Joe Fisher seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Fisher has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately- 3 - presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 125 (Friday, July 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 35371]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14248]



[[Page 35371]]

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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Interest Rates

    The Small Business Administration publishes an interest rate called 
the optional ``peg'' rate (13 CFR 120.214) on a quarterly basis. This 
rate is a weighted average cost of money to the government for 
maturities similar to the average SBA direct loan. This rate may be 
used as a base rate for guaranteed fluctuating interest rate SBA loans. 
This rate will be 2.00 percent for the July-September quarter of FY 
2021.
    Pursuant to 13 CFR 120.921(b), the maximum legal interest rate for 
any third party lender's commercial loan which funds any portion of the 
cost of a 504 project (see 13 CFR 120.801) shall be 6% over the New 
York Prime rate or, if that exceeds the maximum interest rate permitted 
by the constitution or laws of a given State, the maximum interest rate 
will be the rate permitted by the constitution or laws of the given 
State.

John Wade,
Chief, Secondary Market Division.
[FR Doc. 2021-14248 Filed 7-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
Exhibit 13.2





PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with this Annual Report of Torm A/S (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Roland M. Andersen, 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 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.





A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.








Date: June 29, 2010








/s/ Roland M. Andersen


Roland M. Andersen


Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14** 
**- 7481** 

TIMOTHY LEE COLES ,
Plaintiff

– Appellant ,

v.
HAROLD CLARKE, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, sued individually and in official capacity; GARY BASS, Chief of operations of Central Classification Services, sued individually and in official capacity; WENDY HOBBS, Eastern Regional Director, sued individually and in official capacity; MARIE VARGO, Warden of Sussex II State Prison, sued individually and in official capacity; ROY CLARY, Unit Manager of 3 Building of (SXIISP), sued individually and in official capacity; ANTON DANIELS, Correctional Institutional Rehabilitation Counselor of Sussex II State Prison, sued individually and in official capacity ,
Def endants

– Appellees ,
and
GAIL JONES, Chair Person, Central Classification Services (CCS), sued individually and in official capacity ,
Defendant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond

. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. ( 3:12

- cv
- 00001

- REP )

Submitted : February 27, 2015 Decided: March 20, 20152 Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Timothy Lee Coles, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Hoehl O’Shea, Lara Kate Jacobs Todd, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Timothy Lee Coles appeals the district court ’ s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (20 12 ) complaint for failure to

state a claim . We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Coles v. Clarke , No. 3:12

- cv
- 00001

- REP
(E.D. Va. Sept. 12, 2014) . We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Robert W. Pettersen

*John J. Carta, Jr.,*in support of the petition.

*Leon F. Dalbec, Jr.,*deputy assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided January 18, 1990

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 20 Conn. App. 288, is denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

FORT WAYNE DIVISION 

 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) 

 ) 

 v. ) CAUSE NO.: 1:16-CR-35-TLS

 ) 

JOHN M. DOMINGUEZ ) 

 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

 This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 63], filed on August 23, 2018. The Defendant has waived objection 

to the Findings and Recommendation. 

The Court being duly advised, ADOPTS the Findings and Recommendation [ECF No. 

63] in its entirety and ACCEPTS the recommended disposition. Subject to this Court’s 

consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c), if 

applicable and necessary, the plea of guilty to the offenses charged in Count 3 of the Indictment 

are hereby ACCEPTED, and the Defendant is adjudged GUILTY of the offenses. 

 The Sentencing Scheduling Order scheduling sentencing-related deadlines and hearings 

will be issued by separate order.

SO ORDERED on September 10, 2018. 

s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

CHIEF JUDGE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Exhibit 10.21
 
 [COPYTELE, INC. LETTERHEAD]
    March 11, 2009
 
 Videocon Industries Limited
 2nd Floor, Fort House, D.N. Road
 Fort, Mumbai 400 001 (INDIA)
 Attention:
Venugopal N. Dhoot, DirectorNaveen Mandhana, Sr. Vice President
 Dear Sirs:
 
 With respect to the installment of the Technology Transfer Fee scheduled to be paid to by February 16, 2009 under the Amended and Restated Technology License Agreement between Videocon Industries Limited (“Videocon”) and CopyTele, Inc. (“CopyTele”), dated May 16, 2008 (the “License Agreement”), CopyTele hereby waives the February 16, 2009 due date for such installment payment on the condition (i) that Videocon make two partial payments of such installment, each in the amount of US$250,000, the first no later than March 31, 2009 and the second no later than April 30, 2009, and (ii) that Videocon and CopyTele agree upon a mutually acceptable payment schedule for the balance of such installment prior to July 31, 2009. Except as specifically set forth herein, all terms and conditions of the License Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall continue to be valid and binding upon the parties thereto.
 
 Sincerely,
 
 COPYTELE, INC.
 
 
 By:  /s/ Denis A. Krusos
 Denis A. Krusos
 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 21.1

List of Subsidiaries of Pacific Energy Partners, L.P.

The following is a list of subsidiaries of Pacific Energy Partners, L.P. The list reflects the names under which each subsidiary does business.

Subsidiary

Jurisdiction of incorporationAurora Pipeline Company Ltd.

CanadaPacific Atlantic Terminals LLC

Delaware, USAPacific Energy Group LLC

Delaware, USAPacific Energy Finance Corporation

Delaware, USAPacific L.A. Marine Terminals LLC

Delaware, USAPacific Marketing and Transportation LLC

Delaware, USAPacific Pipeline System LLC

Delaware, USAPacific Terminals LLC

Delaware, USAPEG Canada, L.P.

Delaware, USAPEG Canada GP LLC

Delaware, USARanch Pipeline LLC

Delaware, USARangeland Marketing Company

Nova Scotia, CanadaRangeland Northern Pipeline Company

Nova Scotia, CanadaRangeland Pipeline Company

Nova Scotia, CanadaRangeland Pipeline Partnership

Alberta, CanadaRocky Mountain Pipeline System LLC

Delaware, USA


---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2009 of A123
Systems, Inc. (the "Company"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael Rubino, 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, to my knowledge, that:

Dated: March 15, 2010/s/ MICHAEL RUBINO Michael Rubino Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
Order entered August 21, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00330-CV

IN RE KENNETH L. BUHOLTZ, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 469th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 469-51173-2010

ORDER

Before Justices Bridges, Osborne, and Carlyle

Before the Court are relator’s June 17, 2019 motion to supplement the appeal, June 28, 

2019 motion for rehearing, and August 8, 2019 motion to stay proceedings. Relator’s motions 

are DENIED. 

/s/ CORY L. CARLYLE 

JUSTICE
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6297

WREN WILKINS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

H. PERSON,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief

District Judge. (5:06-hc-02106-FL)

Submitted: July 6, 2007 Decided: July 25, 2007

Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wren Wilkins, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge III, NORTH

CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Wren Wilkins seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wilkins has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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. 

DISMISSED
Exhibit 3.3

      State of Delaware
     Secretary of State
  Division or Corporations
Delivered 12:00 PM 08/25/2010
  FILED 10:21 AM 08/25/2010
SRV 100856046 - 4864148 FILE

                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

     FIRST: The name of this corporation shall be:

                      AMINCOR CONTRACT ADMINISTRATORS, INC.

     SECOND: Its registered office in the State of Delaware is to be located at
2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, County of New Castle, Delaware,
19808. The name of its registered agent at such address is The Company
Corporation.

     THIRD: The purpose or purposes of the corporation shall be:

     To engage in any lawful act or activity for which corporations may be
organized under the General Corporation Law of Delaware.

     FOURTH: The total number of shares of stock, which this corporation is
authorized to issue, is One Thousand Five Hundred (1,500) shares of common stock
with no par value.

     FIFTH: The name and address of the incorporator is as follows:

                           The Company Corporation
                           2711 Centerville Road
                           Suite 400
                           Wilmington, Delaware 19808

     SIXTH: The Board of Directors shall have the power to adopt, amend or
repeal the by-laws.

     SEVENTH: No director shall be personally liable to the Corporation or its
stockholders for monetary damages for any breach of fiduciary duty by such
director as a director. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a director shall
be liable to the extent provided by applicable law, (i) for breach of the
director's duty of loyalty to the Corporation or its stockholders, (ii) for acts
or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or a
knowing violation of law, (iii) pursuant to Section 174 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law or (iv) for any transaction from which the director derived an
improper personal benefit. No amendment to or repeal of this Article Seventh
shall apply to or have any effect on the liability or alleged liability of any
director of the Corporation for or with respect to any acts or omissions of such
director occurring prior to such amendment.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the incorporator herein before
named, has executed signed and acknowledged this certificate of incorporation
this 25th day of August, 2010.

                                   The Company Corporation, Incorporator


                                   By: /s/ Paul Pine
                                      ----------------------------------
                                   Name: Paul Pine
                                   Assistant Secretary
EXHIBIT 31.2 RULE 13A - 14(A)/15D - 14(A) CERTIFICATION

I, Linda L. Engle, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Juniata Valley
     Financial Corp.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
     statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
     make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
     statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
     this quarterly report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
     material respects the financial 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 for
     establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
     in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

     a)   designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 being prepared;

     b)   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of June 30, 2003;

     c)   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
     our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
     committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
     equivalent functions):

     a)   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and

     b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
     quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
     controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal
     controls during the quarter ended June 30, 2003, including any corrective
     actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



------------------------------------------
     Linda L. Engle, Executive VP & CFO
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

December 9, 2015

d1202 

# Order

Clerk December 9, 2015

151400 & (50)

KIMBERLY L. SIMS, Succe ssor Personal

Representative of the ESTATE OF KAREN

A. MACASKILL,

Plaintiff

- Appellee/

Cross

- Appellant,

v SC: 151400

COA: 319297

Macomb CC: 2013

- 001126

- NO

THE KROGER COMPANY and KROGER

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,

Defendants,

and

THE KROGER COMPANY OF MICHIGAN,

Defendant

- Appellant/

Cross

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 5, 2015

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

cross

- a ppellant are considered . The application for leave to appeal is DENIED, because

we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court prior

to the completion of the proceedings ordered by the Court of Appeals. The application

for leave to appeal as cross

- appellant is DENIED , because we are not persuaded that the

question presented should be reviewed by this Court

.