alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Meeting

June 30 – July 1, 2004

List of Attachments

No Attachment Author / Presenter

1 Attendance Sheets

2 Action Items Norm Henderson

3 Activity Schedule Norm Henderson

4 Basin Hydrology Dennis Kubly for Tom Ryan

5 E-mail Message re: Geomorphology Symposium Helen Fairley

6 Synthesis of Historical Flow and Sediment Transport

Data for the Colorado River at Lees Ferry and Grand

Canyon Stations

David Topping

7 The Degraded Reach: Rate and Pattern of Bed and

Bank Adjustment in the First 25km Downstream from

Glen Canyon Dam

Paul Grams

8 Sand bar simulations for MLFF and Alternative

Fluctuating Flow Release Patterns

Steve Wiele

9 Evidence for the Failure of the Modified Low Fluctuating

Flow Alternative (MLFF) to Benefit Most Ecological

Resources in the Grand Canyon

Carl Walters

Miscellaneous Documents:

10 Long-term Experimental Ad Hoc Meeting (5/26/04) Notes & Additional Notes

11 Proposed Approach and Core Elements of Long-term Experiment in the Grand Canyon

12 Effects of Fluctuating Flows from Glen Canyon Dam on the Early Life History Stages of

Rainbow Trout in the Lee’s Ferry Reach of the Colorado River - THIS HAS NOT BEEN

PEER REVIEWED AND SHOULDN’T BE CITED IN ANY PUBLICATIONS

13 Modeling of sand bar response to fluctuating flows PPT presentation

14a

14b

TWG Budget Recommendation Process

Timeline for Budget and Workplan Development

15 Multi-Attribute Evaluation of Management Options

16 Draft Outline for SCORE Report
Exhibit 31

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT


We, Ben E. Traub and Ellen M. Luthy certify that:

1. We have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Xerion  EcoSolutions
Group Inc. (the "Registrant") for the period ended September 30, 2003.

2. Based on our  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 our  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. We 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 we 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 a date  within  90  days  prior  to the  filing  date  of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

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. We 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 function):

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.  We 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 subsequent to the date of our most recent
evaluation,   including  any  corrective  actions  with  regard  to  significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Dated: November 7, 2003


By  /s/ Ben Traub
------------------------------------
Ben Traub, Chief Executive Officer



By  /s/ Ellen Luthy
------------------------------------
Ellen Luthy, Principal Financial Officer
# C_2006068EN.01001101.xml

| 21.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/11

---

Publication of decisions by Member States to grant or revoke operating licenses pursuant to Article 13(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 on licensing of air carriers (1)
   (2)

1

2

(2006/C 68/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

SPAIN

Operating licences granted

Category B:   Operating licences including the restriction of Article 5(7)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92

| Name of air carrier | Address of air carrier | Permitted to carry | Decision effective since |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PIRINAIR EXPRESS, S.L. | c/ Ramón Pignatilli, 50 |
| E-50004 Zaragoza |

Name of air carrier

Address of air carrier

Permitted to carry

Decision effective since

PIRINAIR EXPRESS, S.L.

c/ Ramón Pignatilli, 50

E-50004 Zaragoza

passengers, mail, cargo

21.2.2006

---

(1)  OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 1.

1

(2)  Communicated to the European Commission before 31.8.2005.

2

---
Document

Exhibit 10.1
SYNOVUS FINANCIAL CORP.Board of Directors Compensation(Effective April 22, 2020)
 
															
	 	 	 	 	 
	Cash Compensation	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Annual Board Retainer	 		$	55,000 	 	 
	 	 		  	 	 
	Annual Board Committee Member Retainers:	 		  	 	 
	Audit Committee	 		$	15,000 	 	 
	Compensation Committee	 		$	10,000 	 	 
	Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee	 		$	10,000 	 	 
	Risk Committee	 		$	15,000 	 	 
	 	 		  	 	 
	Annual Committee Chair Retainers:**	 		  	 	 
	Audit Committee	 		$	15,000 	 	 
	Compensation Committee	 		$	10,000 	 	 
	Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee	 		$	10,000 	 	 
	Risk Committee 	 		$	15,000 	 	 
					
	Annual Lead Director Retainer	 		$	25,000 	 	 




 
									
			
	**	 	Note: The committee chair will receive both an annual committee member retainer and an annual committee chair retainer.





															
					
	Equity Compensation	 	 	 	 
	 				
	An award of $85,000 in restricted stock units, which becomes fully vested and transferable upon the earlier to occur of the (x) completion of three years of service and (y) date the holder reaches retirement age pursuant to the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines. 
				
	 	 	 	 	 
	Director Stock Purchase Plan	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Annual maximum company cash contribution per director participant to company-sponsored open market stock purchase plan, with company’s contribution equal to 15% of director participant’s cash contribution, subject to annual maximum contribution limit by director of $20,000	 		$	3,000
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 USC 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 Medallion Financial Corp. (the Company) for the quarter ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my
knowledge:

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

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates
and for the periods expressed in the Report.



|                  |  |                                                  
|----------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|By:               |  | /s/ Larry D. Hall                                
|                  |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
|                 
|Date: May 8, 2008
**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 Quarter Report of B-Teller, INC., (the “Company”) on Form
        10-QSB for the Quarter Ended July 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
        Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Armando Russo,
        President and J. A. Claydon, Secretary, certify, 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 my knowledge:
 
 (1) The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
        the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2) The
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 B-TELLER
        USA, INC.
  By /s/
        Armando Russo
 **President**
  By
        /s/ J.
        A.
        Claydon
 **Secretary**
  May
        25,
        2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           89672
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 92002
<PP&E>                                        28676326
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                28788243
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3104740
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    25683503
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  28788243
<SALES>                                        1101329
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1348095
<CGS>                                           567886
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   112244
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                216716
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 451249
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             451249
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    451249
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    15.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    15.20
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.1
 
 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 PLM Equipment Growth Fund III Liquidating Trust (the "Trust"), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the President of the Trustee and of the Trust, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:
 
 (1)  the Report of the Trust filed today 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 net assets in liquidation and changes in net assets in liquidation of the Trust.
 
 
 
 
 
 /s/ James. A. Coyne
 James A. Coyne
 President of PLM Financial Services, Inc.
 March 25, 2004
#### In the Matter of Maria A.M., Respondent, v Dextor N., Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 91]—

Order, Family Court, New York County (Elizabeth Barnett, Referee), entered on or about July 29, 2010, which, after a hearing, dismissed respondent father’s petition alleging that petitioner mother violated a prior custody and visitation order, granted petitioner’s cross petition to modify the order of custody and awarded petitioner sole legal and physical custody of the subject child while awarding respondent liberal visitation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The award of custody to the child’s mother has a sound and substantial basis in the record *(see Matter of James Joseph M. v Rosana R.,*32 AD3d 725, 726 [2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 717 [2006]). Respondent acknowledged that the child does not wish to live with him, there was testimony that, on at least one occasion, the police were called and arrested the child after she had *579an altercation with respondent, and the child, who will soon turn 18, has requested to live with her mother and younger half sibling. Given this evidence, petitioner established that there has been a change in circumstances since the April 29, 2009 custody and visitation order and stipulation were entered, and that the change in custody from respondent to petitioner is in the child’s best interests (see *Matter of O’Connor v Dyer,*18 AD3d 757, 757-758 [2005]).

Respondent’s hearing counsel called petitioner as a witness but did not request that she be declared a hostile witness and made no showing that she was either lying or unwilling to answer his questions. Thus, the referee properly sustained the objection to the leading questions counsel asked petitioner *(see Matter of Amanda L.,*302 AD2d 1004 [2003]). Concur — Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Abdus-Salaam and Román, JJ.
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2048

To provide for the elimination of duty on Ziram.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 7, 1998

Mr. SANTORUM introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To provide for the elimination of duty on Ziram.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF DUTY ON ZIRAM.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subheading 3808.20.24 of the

5 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by striking ‘‘and Metiram’’ and inserting

7 ‘‘Metiram; and Ziram’’.

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or

10 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after

11 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carla Rene BEGAYE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-10188.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 16, 2007 *.

Filed April 20, 2007.

Raynette M. Logan, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jason R. Leonard, Esq., Leonard Law Offices, PC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.

Carla Rene Begaye, Florence, AZ, pro se.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Carla Rene Begaye appeals from her jury-trial conviction and 33-month sentence for harboring illegal aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii). Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Begaye’s counsel has filed a brief stating that he finds no meritorious issues for review, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our examination of the brief and our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no arguable issues for review on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 98-2874SD

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

Marat Movsesyants, *

*

Appellant. *

_____________ Appeals from the United States

District Court for the District

No. 98-2878SD of South Dakota.

_____________

 [UNPUBLISHED]

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

Armen Atayants, *

*

Appellant. *

_____________

No. 98-2879SD

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *
-2-

*

v. *

*

Ivan Kovalev, *

*

Appellant. *

_____________

No. 98-2880SD

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

Alex Nagorniuk, *

*

Appellant. *

_____________

 Submitted: March 9, 1999

Filed: March 18, 1999

_____________

Before FAGG, LAY, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Marat Movsesyants, Armen Atayants, Ivan Kovalev, and Alex Nagorniuk

(collectively the appellants) appeal their convictions on felony charges related to a

motor vehicle theft ring. We affirm.
-3-

The appellants raise several contentions related to the sufficiency of the

evidence supporting their convictions. We reject all of these contentions. First, the

record contains substantial evidence to support the jury's verdicts. Second, we

conclude the district court did not commit reversible error in denying the motions for

dismissal of the indictment, for severance, for judgment of acquittal, and for new trial,

or in instructing the jury about the conspiracy. Third, the appellants' assertions that

the government failed to reveal exculpatory evidence and the district court improperly

admitted evidence against all of the coconspirators are either unsupported by the

record, otherwise without legal merit, or both.

Having carefully reviewed the record, we are satisfied the district court

correctly resolved each of the appellants' claims and an extended opinion by this court

would have no precedential value. We thus affirm the appellants' convictions. See

8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 New Orleans, Louisiana
 close




            Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home People & Locations







Keshia  Simmons
                        Location Support Staff

                        




                        
                        HR Liaison Support
                        Phone: (504) 286-4415
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 17, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-20399

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ALFREDO ALBARENGA-VILLALOBO,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:03-CR-467-ALL 

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

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alfredo Albarenga-Villalobo (Albarenga) appeals from his

sentence imposed on a guilty-plea conviction for illegal 

re-entry. The district court imposed a 58-month term of

imprisonment, followed by a three-year term of supervised

release. 

For the first time on appeal, Albarenga contends that the

“felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)
No. 04-20399

-2-

are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.

466 (2000). As Albarenga concedes, this issue is foreclosed. 

See Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 247 (1998);

United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000).

Albarenga further argues that the Supreme Court’s holding in

Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), should be applied

to sentences determined under the United States Sentencing

Guidelines. As Albarenga also concedes, this argument is

foreclosed by our opinion in United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d

464, 465-66 (5th Cir. 2004), petition for cert. filed (U.S. July

14, 2004) (No. 04-5263), but he raises it to preserve it for

possible further review. Accordingly, the sentence of the

district court is AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6110

JOHNNY LOUIS WARDLAW, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DENT G. LYNCH, JR., Public Defender; OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-97- 4110-MJG) Submitted: June 18, 1998 Decided: July 8, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johnny Louis Wardlaw, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Wardlaw v. Lynch , No. CA-97-4110-MJG (D. Md. Dec. 18, 1997).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