alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 5, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 58237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19970]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service


Emergency Exemption: Issuance of Permit for Endangered Species.

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of emergency issuance of permit for endangered species.

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

SUMMARY: The following permit was issued.

ADDRESSES: Documents and other information submitted for this 
application are available for review, subject to the requirements of 
the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act, by any party who 
submits a written request for a copy of such documents to: U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 4401 North 
Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, Virginia 22203, telephone (703) 
358-2104 or fax (703) 358-2281.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Division of Management Authority, 
telephone (703) 358-2104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 16, 2005, the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service (Service) issued a permit (PRT-109802) to the Virginia 
Polytechnic Institute and State University (CVM Phase 2), Blacksburg, 
VA, to import carcasses from wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) 
collected in Tanzania for the purpose of scientific research. This 
action was authorized under Section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act 
of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The Service determined 
that an emergency affecting the health and life of the chimpanzees 
existed, and that no reasonable alternative was available to the 
applicant for the following reasons.
    Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University requested a 
permit to import carcasses from deceased animals found in the Mahale 
Mountains National Park in Kigoma, Tanzania and the Rubondo Island 
National Park in Mwanza, Tanzania for emergency and ongoing health and 
disease evaluation purposes. The carcasses will be utilized exclusively 
for diagnostic and scientific purposes. The specimens from these 
animals will be used to run diagnostic tests in order to determine the 
cause of illness and death related to an ongoing disease outbreak at 
the National Parks within the past several weeks. The necessary 
diagnostic testing is not available in Africa. The results of health 
and disease testing involving these chimpanzees will help determine 
what caused the outbreak in order to develop interventions to help 
prevent reoccurrence.

    Dated: September 16, 2005.
Michael S. Moore,
Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, Division of Management 
Authority.
[FR Doc. 05-19970 Filed 10-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
#### Douglas Graham (Sometimes Known as Douglas S. Graham) and Mildred E. Graham, his Wife, *Appellants v*. Palm Beach Bond & Mortgage Company, a Corporation of the State of Florida, *Appellee.*

Division B.

Decision Filed April 4, 1928.

*Bitter <& Bankin,*for Appellants;

No appearance for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of *695the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspect ed, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
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.                  

###### National Council on Disability

*Times and Dates:*

September 28, 2005, 2:30 p.m. Eastern.

November 18, 2005, 3 p.m. Eastern.

January 20, 2006, 3 p.m. Eastern.

April 21, 2006, 3 p.m. Eastern.

July 21, 2006, 3 p.m. Eastern.

September 15, 2006, 3 p.m. Eastern.

*Place:*                     National Council on Disability, 1331 F Street, NW., Suite 850, Washington, DC.                

*Agency:*                     National Council on Disability (NCD).                

*Status:*                     All parts of these meetings will be open to the public. Those interested in participating should contact the appropriate staff member listed below.                

*Agenda:*                     Roll call, announcements, reports, new business, adjournment.                

*Contact Person for More Information:*                     Geraldine Drake Hawkins, Ph.D., Program Analyst, National Council on Disability, 1331 F Street, NW., Suite 850, Washington, DC 20004; 202-272-2004 (voice), 202-272-2074 (TTY), 202-272-2022 (fax),                     *ghawkins@ncd.gov*                     (e-mail).                

## Youth Advisory Committee Mission

The purpose of NCD's Youth Advisory Committee is to provide input into NCD activities consistent with the values and goals of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Dated: August 17, 2005.

Ethel D. Briggs,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 05-19069 Filed 9-22-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-MA-P
VR SYSTEMS, INC., Respondent, v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS & ETHICS ENFORCEMENT, Petitioner.

No. COA18-149

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 17, 2018

DISMISSED.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 5, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 58223]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20010]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Security for the Protection of the Public Financial 
Responsibility To Meet Liability Incurred for Death or Injury to 
Passengers or Other Persons on Voyages; Notice of Issuance of 
Certificate (Casualty)

    Notice is hereby given that the following have been issued a 
Certificate of Financial Responsibility To Meet Liability Incurred for 
Death or Injury to Passengers or Other Persons on Voyages pursuant to 
the provisions of section 2, Public Law 89-777 (46 App. U.S.C. 817 (d)) 
and the Federal Maritime Commission's implementing regulations at 46 
CFR part 540, as amended:

American Cruise Lines, Inc., One Marine Park, Haddam, CT 06438,
    Vessel: AMERICAN SPIRIT.
Carnival Corporation (d/b/a Carnival and Carnival Cruise Line), 3655 NW 
87th Avenue, Miami, FL 33178,
    Vessel: CARNIVAL LIBERTY.
Costa Crociere S.p.A. and Costa Cruise Lines N.V., Venture Corporate 
Center II, 200 South Park Road, Suite 200, Hollywood, FL 33021-8541,
    Vessel: COSTA MAGICA.
NCL (Bahamas) Ltd. and Norwegian Jewel Ltd., 7665 Corporate Center 
Drive, Miami, FL 33126,
    Vessel: NORWEGIAN JEWEL.
NCL (Bahamas) Ltd. and Pride of America Ship Holding, Inc., 7665 
Corporate Center Drive, Miami, FL 33126,
    Vessel: PRIDE OF AMERICA.
Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd., 24305 Town Center Drive, Santa Clarita, CA 
91355,
    Vessel: SEA PRINCESS.
Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd., and Carnival PLC, 24305 Town Center Drive, 
Santa Clarita, CA 91355,
    Vessel: PACIFIC PRINCESS and TAHITIAN PRINCESS.
Saga Shipping Company, Ltd., Saga Cruises Ltd., Saga Holidays Limited, 
Saffron Maritime/Columbia Ship Management, Magsaysay Maritime 
Corporation, Saga Group, Saga Holdings Ltd., The Saga Building, Enbrook 
Park, Folkestone, Kent CT20 3SE,
    Vessel: SAGA RUBY.


    Dated: September 30, 2005.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-20010 Filed 10-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined th a t

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 98-30966 Summary Calendar

_____________________

WILLIAM DICKERSON,
Petitioner-Appellant,

versus
BURL CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary,
Respondent-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 97-CV-1379

_________________________________________________________________ May 6, 1999
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

William Dickerson, Louisiana prisoner #130818, appeals the
denial of his habeas corpus petition, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254. Dickerson argues that the prosecutor improperly prevented

a witness from testifying on his beha lf in violation of his due
process rights.
Dickerson has failed to establish that the state made a plea
bargain with a co-defendant witness not to testify, and his claim2

fails. S ee Webb v. Texas , 409 U.S. 95, 98 (1972); United States v.
Henricksen , 564 F.2d 197, 198 (5th Cir. 1977). Thus, Dickerson is

not entitled to habeas relief because th e adjudication on the

merits by the state court did not result in a decision that was contrary to, or involved the unreasonable application of, clearly

established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the

United States. See § 2254(d).

A F F I R M E D.
STATE of North Carolina v. Robert K. STEWART

No. 274P15-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 12, 2018

Robert K. Stewart, for Stewart, Robert K.

Amy Kunstling Irene, Special Deputy Attorney General, Maureen Krueger, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 7th of June 2018 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Moore County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th of June 2018."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th of June 2018 by Defendant to Dismiss All Charges:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th of June 2018."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th of June 2018 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th of June 2018."

*110The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th of June 2018 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th of June 2018."
Exhibit No. 11  Statement re: Computation of Per Share Earnings

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                  Year                Year
                                                                 Ended                Ended
                                                           December 31, 1998     December 31, 1997
                                                           ------------------    -----------------
<S>                                                        <C>                   <C>        
Net income............................................       $ 4,038,000           $ 4,874,000
Weighted average common shares outstanding............         2,894,651             3,656,924
Basic Earnings per share..............................       $      1.39           $      1.33
Weighted average common shares outstanding............         2,894,651             3,656,924
Effect of dilution securities stock options...........           300,844               251,667
Total weighted average common shares outstanding for
  diluted earnings per share computation..............         3,195,495             3,908,591
Diluted earnings per share............................       $      1.26           $      1.25

</TABLE>
Darron J. JONES v. Mr. CRANFORD

No. 80P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 5, 2018

Darron J. Jones, for Jones, Darron J.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 15th of March 2018 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, 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 5th of April 2018."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 15th of March 2018 by Plaintiff to Appoint Counsel:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of April 2018."
STATE of North Carolina v. Jose VILLALOBOS, Defendant.

No. COA17-269

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 3, 2017

NO ERROR.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Brian MATHERNE.

No. 2002-KP-2468.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 2003.

In re Matherne, Brian; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Charles, 29th Judicial District Court Div. E, Nos. 99-0421, 00-102, 00-103; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KH-801.

Denied.
ex10-21.htm


EXHIBIT 10.21


 




PROMISSORY NOTE EXTENSION AGREEMENT


 



	 
$50,000.00

	April 24, 2013





                                                                                                                       


For value received, Guardian 8 Holdings, a Nevada corporation (the “Maker”) promised to pay to C. Stephen Cochennet, or its registered assigns or successors in interest (the “Holder”) the Principal Amount and Interest (both as defined below) in the manner and upon the terms and conditions as set forth in that Term Note (“Note”) in the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000), dated January 24, 2013, which Note becomes due and payable on or about April 24, 2013.




By execution by the parties herein, this Promissory Note Extension Agreement extends the Maturity Date of the Note to and including June 23, 2013. All terms and conditions of the Note shall remain the same other than the Maturity Date.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Maker and Holder have caused this Promissory Note Extension Agreement to be executed and delivered as of the day and year first above written.


 


“Maker”


Guardian 8 Holdings


a Nevada corporation




 


By: /s/ Kathleen Hanrahan                                                                


                                                                                                Kathleen Hanrahan, Chief Financial Officer


 


“Holder”




 


/s/ C. Stephen Cochennet                                                                


C. Stephen Cochennet
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4597 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the intentional discrimination of a person or organization by an employee of the Internal Revenue 

Service. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2014 

Mr. CULBERSON (for himself, Mr. CARTER, Mr. STOCKMAN, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, and Mr. CHABOT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the intentional discrimination of a person or organization by an 

employee of the Internal Revenue Service. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INTENTIONAL DISCRIMINATION BY EMPLOYEE 

4 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 93 of title 18, United 

6 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol7 lowing: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4597 IH

1 ‘‘§ 1925. Intentional discrimination by employee of 

2 the Internal Revenue Service 

3 ‘‘(a) OFFENSE.—It shall be unlawful for any officer 

4 or employee of the Internal Revenue Service to, regardless 

5 of whether the officer or employee is acting under color 

6 of law, willfully act, or purport to act, in his official capac7 ity with the intent to injure, oppress, threaten, intimidate, 

8 or single out and subject to undue scrutiny for purposes 

9 of harassment any person or organization in any State— 

10 ‘‘(1) based solely or primarily on the political, 

11 economic, or social positions held or expressed by 

12 the person or organization; or 

13 ‘‘(2) because the person or organization has ex14 pressed a particular political, economic, or social po15 sition using any words or writing allowed by law. 

16 ‘‘(b) PENALTY.—Any person who violates subsection 

17 (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more 

18 than 10 years, or both. 

19 ‘‘(c) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘State’ 

20 means a State of the United States, the District of Colum21 bia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the 

22 United States.’’. 

23 (b) TABLE OF SECTIONS.—The table of sections for 

24 chapter 93 of title 18, United States Code, is amended 

25 by inserting after the item relating to section 1924 the 

26 following: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4597 IH

‘‘1924. Intentional discrimination by employee of the Internal Revenue Service.’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit
32.2
  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies that the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 of Pure Biofuels
Corp. (the “Company”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Date:
      November 12, 2010/s/
      Juan SantoyoJuan
      Santoyo, Chief Financial
Officer
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Pure Biofuels Corp. and will
be retained by Pure Biofuels Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
  46
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-20616 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JUAN JOSE NAVARRO; RAFAEL CUEVAS Defendants-Appellants
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-300-2
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, STEWART, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Juan Jose Navarro appeals the sentence imposed following his conviction for conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and 1000 kilograms or more of marijuana, possession with the intent to distribute 1 000 kilograms or more of marijuana, possession with the intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana, possession with the intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, and possession with the intent to distribute 10

0 kilograms or more of marijuana. Navarro argues that his United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D January 30, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 06-20616

2 sentence was imposed in violation of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), because the district court applied enhancements for possessing a dangerous weapon and for his role as organizer/leader. He contends that the facts to support these enhancements must be either admitted by him or found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Navarro was sentenced in July 2006, after the issuance of Booker

. Thus, the district court’s determination, under an advisory guidelines scheme, that varioussentenceenhancementsshould be applied in the calculation ofN avarro’s sentence, did not violate Navarro’s Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial. See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir. 2005). Rafael Cue

vas appeals his conviction for possession with the intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana and conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine or 1000 kilograms or more of marijuana. Cuevas argues that the Government’s untimely disclosure of Jesus Carrera’s arrest record violated his due process rights under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963). Because Cuevas complains of late disclosure rather than suppression of favorableevidence, thiscourt determineswhether Cuevaswas prejudiced by the untimely disclosure. See United States v. Walters, 351 F.3d 159, 169 (5th Cir. 2003). Cuevas was granted a continuance during trial to determine whether Carrera had been convicted of murder in Mexico. Carrera was cross-examined extensively on his alleged murder convictions as well as other criminal transgressions. Because Cuevas had time to investigate and put the information to effective use at trial, he was not prejudiced by the late disclosure ofCarrera’s criminal history, and there is no Brady violation. See id. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
DURHAM COUNTY, ON BEHALF OF Terrance ADAMS v. Alma ADAMS

No. 99P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 7, 2018

Timothy J. Peterkin, Attorney at Law, Knightdale, for Durham County o/b/o Terrance Adams

Dorothy O'Neill, Durham, Britney Weaver, N. Joanne Foil, Attorneys at Law, for Adams, Alma *107***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Plaintiff on the 2nd of April 2018 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Defendant, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 2nd of April 2018 by Plaintiff 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:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."

Upon consideration of the amended petition filed on the 17th of April 2018 by Plaintiff 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 as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."
COURTNEY NC LLC v. BALDWIN

219P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 28, 2017

Monette Baldwin, for Baldwin, Monette.

A. Bartlett White, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Stephanie D'Atri, Attorney at Law, for Courtney NC, LLC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd of August 2017 by Defendant for Sanctions:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."

Beasley, J. and Morgan, J. recused