alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 31691]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14789]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending 
Nominations

    Nominations for the following properties being considered for 
listing in the National Register were received by the National Park 
Service before May 26, 2001.
    Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60 written comments 
concerning the significance of these properties under the National 
Register criteria for evaluation may be forwarded to the National 
Register, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, NC400, Washington, DC 
20240. Written comments should be submitted by June 27, 2001.

Carol D. Shull,
Keeper of the National Register Of Historic Places.

California

Orange County
    Ebell Society of Santa Ana Valley, 625 N. French St., Santa Ana, 
01000682

Florida

Sarasota County
    Appleby Building, 501-513 Kumquat Court, Sarasota, 01000683

Missouri

Bates County
    Bates County Courthouse, 1 North Delaware, Butler, 01000684

South Dakota

Hanson County
    Saint Peter's Grotto, O.5 mi N of Chicago and North Western 
Railroad Tracks, Farmer, 01000686

Wisconsin

Brown County
    Holy Cross Church and Convent, 3001 Bay Settlement Rd., Green Bay, 
01000685
    In order to preserve the following resource the comment period for 
the following resource has been shortened to three (3) days:
    A request for a MOVE has been made for the following resource:

Iowa

Polk County
    Vail, Mrs. Marian D.-Prof. Charles Noyes Kinney House (Drake 
University and Related Properties in Des Moines, Iowa, 1881-1918 MPS) 
1318 27th St., Des Moines, 88001340
[FR Doc. 01-14789 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Willie Garrett, Appellant.

[876 NYS2d 580]—

Appeal from a judgment of the Oneida County Court (Barry M. Donalty, J.), rendered January 9, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of murder in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25 [3]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his challenge to the voluntariness of the plea inasmuch as he failed to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction *(see People v Kuras,*49 AD3d 1196, 1197 [2008], *lv denied*10 NY3d 866 [2008]; *People v Lacey,*49 AD3d 1259 [2008], *lv denied*10 NY3d 936 [2008]). Defendant contends *1390that this case falls within the narrow exception to the preservation doctrine set forth in *People v Lopez*(71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]) because County Court failed to conduct a sufficient inquiry on the issues whether defendant was on medication at the time of the plea and whether he had an intoxication defense, to ensure that the plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered. We conclude, however, that the court had no duty to conduct such an inquiry inasmuch as “nothing in the plea allocution cast significant doubt on defendant’s guilt or otherwise called into question the voluntariness of the plea,” and thus the narrow exception to the preservation doctrine does not apply *(Lacey,*49 AD3d at 1260; *see generally Lopez,*71 NY2d at 666; *People v Maysonet,*38 AD3d 1330 [2007], *lv denied*9 NY3d 847 [2007]). When the court asked defendant during the plea colloquy if he had any physical or mental problems, defendant responded “[n]ah.” As the court noted, defendant’s responses during the plea allocution established that defendant understood the terms and consequences of the plea *(see generally People v Forshey,*298 AD2d 962, 963 [2002], *lv denied*99 NY2d 558, 100 NY2d 561 [2002]). On appeal, defendant relies solely on information in the presentence report that he was prescribed an antidepressant four years before his commission of the offense in question, and that he reported to the probation officer that he was high on marihuana at the time of the offense. We note, however, that there was no statement in the presentence report that defendant’s marihuana use at the time of the offense rendered defendant unable to form the intent necessary for the commission of the offense *(see People v Jordan,*292 AD2d 860 [2002], *lv denied*98 NY2d 698 [2002]). Present — Hurlbutt, J.P., Martoche, Centra, Peradotto and Gorski, JJ.
#### Howard L. ROBINSON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD; Helen F. Fahey, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-6578.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 19, 2010.

Decided: Oct. 27, 2010.

Howard L. Robinson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Howard Robinson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief without prejudice on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Robinson v. Virginia Parole Bd.,*No. 2:10-cv-00140-MSD-FB S (E.D. Va. April 7, 2010). We deny all of Robinson’s pending motions and 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.*
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. JUAN HERIBERTO MURILLO

- MACIAS, AKA Juan Heriberto Murillo Macias,

Defendant

- Appellant. No s
. 18

- 10380 18

- 10381
D.C. No s . 4:17

- cr - 01703

- RM

- DTF

4:14

- cr - 00256

- RM

- DTF MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Rosemary Márquez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 18, 2019 **
Before: FARRIS, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN , Circuit Judges. In these consolidated appeals, Juan Heriberto Murillo

- Macias appeals from his g uilty

- plea conviction and 30

- month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the revocation of supervised release and consecutive 9

- month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision w ithout oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

SEP 23 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 10380 & 18

- 10381

California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Murillo

- Macias’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Murillo

- Macias the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se suppleme ntal brief or answering brief has been filed. Murillo

- Macias waived his right to appeal his reentry conviction and 30

- month sentence . Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver, we dismiss appeal no. 18

- 10380. S ee Un ited States v. Watson , 582 F.3d 974, 986

- 88 (9th Cir. 2009). Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief with respect to the revocation of supervised release or the s entence imposed upon revocation . We therefore aff

irm the judgment in appeal no. 18

- 10381

. Appellee’s motion for leave to file its late letter is GRANTED. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. Appeal No. 18
- 10380 DISMISSED; Appeal No. 18
- 10381 AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                   Exhibit 23.1




                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
of Concentra Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 33-97040) of our reports dated
May 7, 1997, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements and
financial statement schedule of Concentra Corporation as of March 31, 1997 and
1996, and for each of the three years in the period ended March 31, 1997, which
reports are included in this 10-K.





                                                   /s/  COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Boston, Massachusetts
June 27, 1997




                                       58
**Supplement to Fidelity'sTargeted InternationalEquity Funds**®****
H. Res. 1264 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 7, 2010. 

Whereas essential tremor is the most common movement disorder, affecting up to 10 million Americans, including 4 

to 5 percent of people aged 40 to 60, and 6 to 9 percent 

of people aged 60 and older; 

Whereas essential tremor is often misdiagnosed as Parkinson’s disease, dystonia and other neurological movement 

disorders, most people with essential tremor are not diagnosed until after several visits to many physicians; 

Whereas essential tremor is not a normal outcome of aging, 

as believed by many people including some physicians, 

but is an abnormal condition, primarily genetic, afflicting 

people of all ages, including newborns; 

Whereas there are no medications that have been developed 

for people with essential tremor, the medications currently being used were developed for other conditions and 

only help 60 percent of the people affected, and the only 

treatment specifically designed for essential tremor is 

brain surgery; 

Whereas essential tremor interferes with a person’s ability to 

perform activities of daily living such as grooming and 

writing, and in approximately 5 percent of cases, is totally disabling; 
2 

•HRES 1264 EH 

Whereas research shows that people with essential tremor 

have a higher incidence of depression than the general 

population and that a significant number of these people 

isolate themselves in their homes; 

Whereas essential tremor is a chronic condition that undermines the American economy through lost wages and 

work hours and high medical costs in getting an accurate 

diagnosis; 

Whereas overcoming the medical, social, and economic issues 

listed in this resolution depends upon research and research funding is dependent upon awareness; and 

Whereas March would be an appropriate month to designate 

as ‘‘National Essential Tremor Awareness Month’’: Now, 

therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) supports the designation of ‘‘National Essential 

Tremor Awareness Month’’ for the purpose of raising 

awareness about the Nation’s number one neurological 

condition, affecting approximately 10,000,000 Americans; and 

(2) encourages the people of the United States to 

support the observance of National Essential Tremor 

Awareness Month by participating in the educational ac-
3 

•HRES 1264 EH 

tivities of the International Essential Tremor Foundation. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
No. 142

(October Term, 1934).

#### Stewart v. Keyes et al.

October 14, 1935.

295 U. S. 403.
```

[Federal Register: October 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 200)]
[Notices]
[Page 61031]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17oc06-66]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, November 24, 2006.

Place: 1155 21st., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference
Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Surveillance matters.

Contact Person for More Information: Eileen A. Donovan, 202-418-5100.

Eileen A. Donovan,
Acting Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 06-8755 Filed 10-13-06; 2:04 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS**

 

Storage Computer Corporation 

Nashua, HewHampshire 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Forms S-8 (No. 333-48987, No. 333-69536 and No. 333-31207) of our audit report dated March 30, 2004, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Storage Computer Corporation appearing in the Company’s AnnualReport on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003. 

 

/s/    Sullivan Bille, P.C.                    

Sullivan Bille, P.C. 

 

Tewksbury, Massachusetts 

March 30, 2004
No. 600.

#### Lincoln Mortgage & Title Guaranty Co. et al. *v.*Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

January 6, 1936.

*Messrs. Merritt Lane*and *Samuel Kaufman*for petitioners.

*Solicitor General Reed, Assistant Attorney General Wideman,*and *Messrs. Sewall Key*and *Morton K. Rothschild for*respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 33-80797, No. 33-90616, No. 333-06390, No. 333-06862
and No. 333-07226) of STMicroelectronics NV of our report dated January 25, 1999
relating to the financial statements, which appears on page 58 of the Annual
Report to Shareholders, which is incorporated in this Annual Report on Form
20-F. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated
January 25, 1999 relating to the financial statement schedule, which appears in
this Form 20-F.



PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS NV
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
June 25, 1999
##### 



SHAW COMMUNICATIONS INC.
CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Pursuant to Section 906(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States In connection with the annual report of Shaw Communications Inc. (the
Corporation) on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending August 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Jim Shaw, Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, 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; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Corporation. Dated at Calgary, Alberta
this 25th day of January, 2005. (signed) "Jim Shaw"Jim ShawChief Executive Officer
Shaw Communications Inc.




---



##### 



SHAW COMMUNICATIONS INC.
CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER Pursuant to Section 906(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States In connection with the annual report of Shaw Communications Inc. (the
Corporation) on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending August 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Steve Wilson, Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer
of the Corporation, 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; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Corporation. Dated at Calgary, Alberta
this 25th day of January, 2005. (signed) "Steve Wilson"Steve WilsonSenior Vice-President and Chief
Financial Officer
Shaw Communications Inc.
No. 554.

#### Leithauser *v.*Hartford Fire Insurance Co.

November 25, 1935.

*Mr. T. T. Ansberry*for petitioner.

*Mr. Harold*
      *646
      *W. Fraser*for respondent.

*645Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
##### 



SHAW COMMUNICATIONS INC.
CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 
  1.
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.
   (signed) Jim ShawJim ShawChief Executive Officer
Shaw Communications Inc.




---



##### 



SHAW COMMUNICATIONS INC.
CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
  1.
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.
   (signed) Steve WilsonSteve WilsonSenior Vice-President and Chief Financial
Officer
Shaw Communications Inc.
exv10w4



 





Exhibit 10.4




DIGENE CORPORATION




NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION POLICY




Each non-employee director of Digene Corporation is entitled to receive:




	•	 	an annual retainer fee of $25,000 and an additional annual retainer of $10,000 for
the Audit Committee Chair, $5,000 for the other Audit Committee members and $5,000 for
the Compensation Committee Chair;
	 
	•	 	a fee of $1,500 for each Board meeting attended in person, and $750 for each
in-person Board meeting attended by conference telephone;
	 
	•	 	a fee of $750 for each telephonic Board meeting lasting longer than thirty minutes;
	 
	•	 	a fee of $1,000 for each Audit or Compensation Committee meeting attended in person
other than committee meetings held on the same day as in-person Board meetings;
	 
	•	 	a fee of $500 for each telephonic Audit or Compensation Committee meeting lasting
longer than thirty minutes;
	 
	•	 	a fee of $500 for each Nominating and Corporate Governance or Compliance Committee
meeting attended in person other than committee meetings held on the same day as
in-person Board meetings;
	 
	•	 	a fee of $250 for each telephonic Nominating and Corporate Governance or Compliance
Committee meeting lasting longer than thirty minutes;
	 
	•	 	upon first joining the Board, a grant of options to purchase 10,000 shares of our
common stock, which will become exercisable as to 33%, 33% and 34% of the underlying shares on the first, second and third anniversaries of the date of grant and have a
term of seven years;
	 
	•	 	upon first joining the Board, an award of restricted stock units with a fair market
value of $90,000 on the date of such award, which will vest as to 33%, 33% and 34% on
each of the first, second and third anniversaries of the date of grant;
	 
	•	 	an annual grant, to each non-employee director who will continue to serve as a
director after the annual meeting of our stockholders, of immediately exercisable
options to purchase 5,000 shares of our common stock;
	 
	•	 	an annual award, to each non-employee director who will continue to serve as a
director after the annual meeting of our stockholders, of restricted stock units with a
fair market value of $45,000 on the date of such award, which will vest on the




 









 






	 	 	earlier of the date of the next annual meeting of our stockholders or the first
anniversary of the award date; and
	 
	•	 	reimbursement for all reasonable travel expenses incurred in connection with Board
of Directors’ meetings and meetings of committees of the Board of Directors.





     2
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1317 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1317

  Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the value-
   added tax in addition to existing Federal taxes is a massive tax 
 increase that will result in hardships for United States families and 
     job-creating small business and will stunt economic recovery.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 29, 2010

    Mr. Lance (for himself, Mr. Burgess, Mrs. McMorris Rodgers, Mr. 
Chaffetz, Ms. Jenkins, Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, Mr. Lee of New York, 
 Mr. Boozman, Mr. Cole, Mr. Hastings of Washington, Mr. Hoekstra, Mr. 
  Kingston, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr. Moran of Kansas, and Mr. Paul) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                           on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the value-
   added tax in addition to existing Federal taxes is a massive tax 
 increase that will result in hardships for United States families and 
     job-creating small business and will stunt economic recovery.

Whereas a value-added tax (VAT) is a sales tax imposed on the transfer of goods 
        at each stage of the production or supply chain, and is determined by 
        reference to the value added by each firm in the chain;
Whereas a VAT is a tax on the transfer of goods at each stage of production;
Whereas a VAT is hidden from the end user;
Whereas a VAT unfairly targets low- and middle-income wage earners by assessing 
        value on every production activity and passing the cost on to the 
        consumer;
Whereas President Barack Obama and Senior Economic Advisor Paul Volcker have 
        suggested instituting a VAT on top of income tax;
Whereas United States taxpayers will be subject to a tax increase as a result of 
        the recently enacted health care reform legislation and the expiration 
        of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts;
Whereas, of the 10 major OECD nations with a VAT, only one has lowered the rate 
        since 1962;
Whereas Denmark has increased their rate from 9 percent to 25 percent, Germany 
        from 10 percent to 19 percent, and Italy from 12 percent to 20 percent;
Whereas, in Europe, this heavier spending and tax burden has also meant lower 
        levels of income growth and job creation; and
Whereas deficit reduction can be achieved by cutting wasteful spending, 
        promoting policies for job creation, and expanding opportunities for 
        small business: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
a value-added tax in addition to existing Federal taxes is a massive 
tax increase that will result in hardships for United States families 
and job-creating small business and will stunt economic recovery.
                                 <all>
```
# FCM Data October 2013

SELECTED FCM FINANCIAL DATA AS OF October 31,&KFF0000 &K0000002013FROM REPORTS FILED BY December 4,&KFF0000 &K0000002013	&P of &N