alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 131 (Monday, July 11, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 41125]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14831]


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

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m.

Place: Hybrid Meeting: 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC (12\th\ 
Floor) and virtual.

Note: For those attending the meeting in person, current COVID-19 
safety protocols for visitors, which are based on the CDC COVID-19 
community level in Washington, DC, will be updated on the commission's 
contact page by the Monday before the meeting. See the contact page at 
https://www.fec.gov/contact/. If you would like to virtually access the 
meeting, see the instructions below.

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the public, subject to the above-
referenced guidance regarding the COVID-19 community level and 
corresponding health and safety procedures. To access the meeting 
virtually, go to the commission's website www.fec.gov and click on the 
banner to be taken to the meeting page.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Draft Advisory Opinion 2022-06: Hispanic Leadership Trust
Draft Advisory Opinion 2022-09: Democratic Party of Wisconsin Federal
Draft Advisory Opinion 2022-07: Congressman Eric Swalwell and Swalwell 
for Congress
Management and Administrative Matters

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  Judith Ingram, Press Officer. 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
    Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.
    Individuals who plan to attend in person and who require special 
assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable 
accommodations, should contact Laura E. Sinram, Acting Secretary and 
Clerk, at (202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date.

Vicktoria J. Allen,
Acting Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022-14831 Filed 7-7-22; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED SAM ZALLOUM ,

Appellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 21

- 1671 LT Case No. 2012- 12455 -CIDL
TH E BAN K OF NEW YOR K MELLON F/K/A THE BANK OF NEW YORK, A S TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS OF CWALT, INC., ALTERNATIV E LOAN TRUST 2006-0A11, MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, ETC., ET AL.,

Appellee s

. ________________________________/ Decision filed May 3, 2022 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County, Randell H. Rowe, III , Judge. Sam Zalloum, Enterprise, pro se. Nancy M. Wallace, of Akerman LLP, Tallahassee, Eric M. Levine, of Akerman LLP, West Palm Beach, and William P. Heller, of Akerman LLP, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee , The Bank of New York Mellon

. No Appearance for Remaining Appellees. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. LAMBERT, C.J., TRAVER and NARDELLA, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 29, 2010 

p0322 

Order 

 

March 29, 2010 

139869(44) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139869 

 COA: 286414 

Macomb CC: 2005-003996-FC 

CARLOS MARCELINO GONZALEZ, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s January 29, 

2010 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2012 (the Report) of APOLLO INVESTMENT CORPORATION (the Registrant), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, JAMES C. ZELTER, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

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

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



| |  |                       |  | 
| |  | --------------------- |  | 
| |  |                      
| |  | /s/ JAMES C. ZELTER   |  | 
| |  | Name: James C. Zelter |  | 
| |  | Date: August 8, 2012  |  | 



60
STATE of North Carolina v. Angela Marie DOZIER.

No. 24P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 6, 2006.

Angela M. Dozier, Pro Se.

Amanda P. Little, Assistant Attorney General, Sam Currin, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 12th day of January 2006 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of April 2006."
STATE v. Leroy BODIE.

No. 142P00-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

William P. Hart, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Garry W. Frank, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 24th day of April 2006 by Defendant for "Petition for Plain Error Review N.C.G.S. 7A-31(B)(1)(2)(3)":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 29th day of June 2006."
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Gregory A.Wells, Chief Financial Officer of NTS Realty Capital, Inc., the managinggeneral partner of NTS Realty Holdings Limited Partnership (the “Company”),certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

1.                                       The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of theCompany for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: | May 8, 2009                                   |     |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|----------|
| Name:  | */s/ Gregory A. Wells*                             | * * |
|   | Gregory A. Wells                                   |     |
| Title: | Chief Financial Officer of                         |     |
|   | NTS Realty Capital Inc., the Managing General      |     |
|   | Partner of NTS Realty Holdings Limited Partnership |     |

 

The foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Qas a separate disclosure document.

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
* 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

March 21, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-61066

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

KENNY FRANKLIN EDMONSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:01-CR-27-1

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

Before SMITH, GARZA and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Kenny Franklin Edmonson appeals the revocation of the term

of supervised release imposed after his 2002 conviction for

access device fraud. He contends that the evidence was

insufficient to prove that he violated conditions of supervised

release either by failing to report to his probation officer or

by committing another crime.

Uncontested evidence showed that Edmonson was required to

report to his probation officer in person but repeatedly failed
No. 04-61066

-2-

to do so. Edmonson has also failed to show that the district

court incorrectly applied Mississippi law or made clearly

erroneous factual findings by concluding, by a preponderance of

the evidence, that Edmonson committed a Mississippi crime by

writing at least one check on an account that was closed. See

United States v. McCormick, 54 F.3d 214, 219 (5th Cir. 1995);

United States v. Smith, 417 F.3d 483, 486-87 (5th Cir.), cert.

denied, 126 S. Ct. 713 (2005). The district court did not abuse

its discretion by revoking supervised release. See McCormick, 54

F.3d 219.

Edmonson has abandoned his contention that his sentence

violated the rule of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220

(2005). 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard James, Appellant.

[799 NYS2d 429]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Resnik, J.), rendered May 5, 2003, convicting him of grand larceny in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

*429Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606 [1979]). H. Miller, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein, Mastro and Lifson, JJ., concur.
STATE v. Paul Dewayne CUMMINGS.

No. 1A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 23, 2006.

William N. Farrell, Jr., Senior Deputy Attorney General, Ben David, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 20th day of January 2006 by Defendant for Extension of Time to Serve Proposed Record on Appeal:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant shall have up to and including the 22nd day of February 2006 to serve his/her proposed record upon the district attorney. The parties shall then proceed to settle and file the record on appeal pursuant to the provisions of Appellate Rules 11 and 12. By order of the Court in conference this the 23rd day of January 2006."
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-13917, 333-14509, 333-18851,
333-51291, 333-40932, 333-48114, 333-86376, 333-102738 and 333-107638) pertaining to Sabre Holdings Corporation Amended and
Restated Long-Term Incentive Plan; The Sabre Group Holdings, Inc. 1996 Amended and Restated Long-Term Incentive Plan, 1996 Directors Stock Incentive Plan, Employee Stock
Purchase Plan and Deferred Compensation Plan; Sabre Holdings Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan, Sabre Holdings Corporation 2000 Stock Option Plan; GetThere.com, Inc. 1996 Stock Incentive
Plan and 1999 Stock Incentive Plan; Travelocity.com LP Second Amended 1999 Long-Term Incentive Plan, Travelocity Holdings, Inc. Amended 1999 Long-Term Incentive Plan,
Travelocity.com LP Employee Stock Purchase Plan and Travelocity Holdings, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan and Sabre Holdings Corporation 2003 Directors Deferred Compensation and Deferred
Stock Unit Plan, respectively; and the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No 333-99209) of our reports dated March 10, 2005 with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and financial statement schedule of Sabre Holdings Corporation, Sabre Holdings Corporation management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Sabre Holdings Corporation, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2004.

/s/
ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Dallas,
Texas
March 10, 2005

---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,416
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   44,525
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,420
<INVENTORY>                                     22,047
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                76,438
<PP&E>                                         100,072
<DEPRECIATION>                                  51,543
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 146,325
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,489
<BONDS>                                          4,779
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            16
<OTHER-SE>                                      81,874
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   146,325
<SALES>                                        187,478
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               187,478
<CGS>                                          106,166
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  106,166
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                61,081
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   693
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,616
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 18,593
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,508
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             12,085
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,085
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
1Pursuant 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

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 98-30457

_______________________

LUCILLE BERGERON STELLY, Individually and on behalf of Oliver

Joseph Stelly Jr., LARRY JAMES STELLY; DEBRA ANN STELLY GUIDRY;

LONNIE JOSEPH STELLY; BONNIE STELLY GUNTER; CYNTHIA ANN STELLY;

LUCY MARIE STELLY; CONNIE STELLY THOMASSEE; PAMELA ANN STELLY;

SAMANTHA STELLY QUEBEDEAUX,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

HOWARD ZERANGUE, JR., Individually and as Sheriff of St. Landry

Parish, Louisiana, ET AL,

Defendants,

HOWARD ZERANGUE, JR., Individually and as Sheriff of St. Landry

Parish, Louisiana; FLOYD SOILEAU; AUGUST DURROSSEAU, Individually

and as Deputy Sheriff of St. Landry Parish; MICHAEL S. STELLY,

Individually and as Deputy Sheriff of St. Landry Parish, LAURA

BALTHAZAR, Individually and as Deputy Sheriff of St. Landry Parish,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

(96-CV-2113)

_________________________________________________________________

May 17, 1999

Before JONES, DUHÈ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.*

PER CURIAM:1
2

The court has considered this appeal by means of the

briefs, oral argument and pertinent portions of the record. Having

done so, we cannot conclude that the district court committed clear

error in exonerating the appellees of state-law negligence. The

district court rested his findings not only on evidence in the

record, but also on credibility determinations that resolved

serious factual disputes. This court is not in a position to

second-guess those critical determinations. No constitutional

claims are preserved here. The judgment of the district court is

therefore AFFIRMED.

AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-6512

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

JERRY DAVIS, 

 Defendant – Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior 

District Judge. (6:03-cr-01092-HMH; 6:08-cv-70123-HMH) 

Submitted: June 18, 2009 Decided: July 2, 2009 

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

Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Marcia G. Shein, LAW OFFICE OF MARCIA G. SHEIN, PC, Decatur, 

Georgia, for Appellant. Robert Frank Daley, Jr., Assistant 

United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, Leesa 

Washington, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Jerry Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). 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 Davis 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
exv10w1



 








EXHIBIT 10.1




FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

HOLLY CORPORATION LONG-TERM INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN

As Amended and Restated

(Formerly designated the Holly Corporation 2000 Stock Option Plan)




     THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is effective May 10, 2005 and is made by Holly Corporation (the
“Company”).



W  I  T  N  E  S  S  E  T  H:




     WHEREAS, the board of directors of the Company (the “Board”) adopted the Holly Corporation
Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan, as amended and restated (formerly designated the Holly
Corporation 2000 Stock Option Plan), effective as of December 12, 2002 (the “Plan”);



     WHEREAS, Section 10(f) of the Plan provides that the Plan may be amended by the Board without
approval of the stockholders of the Company, except that any amendment to the Plan of which
approval of the stockholders is required by any federal or state law or regulation or the rules of
any stock exchange on which the shares of the Company are listed or quoted must be approved by the
stockholders of the Company; and



     WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the Plan to provide that a Performance Award granted under
the Plan may include a right to receive cash and/or other consideration other than shares of the
common stock of the Company.



     NOW, THEREFORE, Section 2(q) of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:




     (q) “Performance Award” means a right granted to a Participant under
Section 8 hereof to receive cash and/or other consideration other than Shares based
on performance conditions, as provided in Section 8, measured over a period of not
less than one year nor more than 10 years.



     NOW, THEREFORE, be it further provided that, except as provided above, the Plan shall continue
to be read in its current state.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this First Amendment has been executed by a duly authorized officer of the
Company as of the date specified below and effective as set forth herein.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	HOLLY CORPORATION	 	 
	 

	     a Delaware corporation	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	By: 	/s/ W. John Glancy	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	Name: W. John Glancy	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	Title: Senior Vice President and General Counsel	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	Date: as of May 10, 2005
IIB 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5511 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 20 (legislative day, JUNE 19), 2008 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 

Bureau of Reclamation, to remedy problems caused by 

a collapsed drainage tunnel in Leadville, Colorado, and 

for other purposes. 

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


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

HR 5511 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE TUNNEL REMEDI2 ATION. 

3 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be cited as the 

4 ‘‘Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Remediation Act of 

5 2008’’. 

6 (b) TUNNEL REMEDIATION.—The Reclamation 

7 Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Pub8 lic Law 102–575) is amended as follows: 

9 (1) By striking section 705. 

10 (2) In section 708(a)— 

11 (A) by striking ‘‘(a)’’ and inserting 

12 ‘‘(a)(1)’’; 

13 (B) by striking ‘‘The Secretary shall have’’ 

14 and inserting ‘‘Except as provided by paragraph 

15 (2), the Secretary shall have’’; and 

16 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

17 ‘‘(2) The Secretary shall participate in the implemen18 tation of the operable unit 6 remedy for the California 

19 Gulch Superfund Site, as such remedy is defined in the 

20 Environmental Protection Agency’s 2003 Record of Deci21 sion for such operable unit, by— 

22 ‘‘(A) treating water behind any blockage or 

23 bulkhead in the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, in24 cluding surface water diverted into the Tunnel 

25 workings as part of the remedy; and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
3 

HR 5511 RFS 

1 ‘‘(B) managing and maintaining the mine pool 

2 behind such blockage or bulkhead at a level that pre3 cludes surface runoff and releases and minimizes the 

4 potential for tunnel failure due to excessive water 

5 pressure in the tunnel.’’. 

6 (3) In section 708(f), by striking ‘‘and 708’’ 

7 and inserting ‘‘, 708, and 709’’. 

8 (4) By adding at the end of title VII the fol9 lowing: 

10 ‘‘SEC. 709. TUNNEL MAINTENANCE. 

11 ‘‘The Secretary shall take such steps to repair or 

12 maintain the structural integrity of the Leadville Mine 

13 Drainage Tunnel (LMDT) as may be necessary in order 

14 to prevent tunnel failure and to preclude uncontrolled re15 lease of water from any portion of the tunnel.’’. 

16 (5) In the table of sections contained in section 

17 2— 

18 (A) by striking the item relating to section 

19 705; and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
4 

HR 5511 RFS 

1 (B) by inserting after the item relating to 

2 section 708 the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 709. Tunnel maintenance.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 19, 2008. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS