alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 25, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 61600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21242]


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

APPALACHIAN STATES LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE COMMISSION


Annual Meeting

Time and Date:  10 a.m.-12:30 p.m. November 4, 2005.

Place:  Harrisburg Hilton and Towers, One North Second Street, 
Harrisburg, PA 17101.

Status:  Most of the meeting will be open to the public. If there is a 
need for an executive session (closed to the public), it will be 
announced at the meeting.

Matters to be Considered:  Portions Open to the Public: The primary 
purpose of this meeting is to (1) review the independent auditors' 
report of Commission's financial statements for fiscal year 2004-2005; 
(2) review the Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) generation 
information for 2004; (3) consider a proposal budget for fiscal year 
2006-2007; (4) review recent national developments regarding LLRW 
management and disposal; (5) discuss the need for a survey of LLRW 
generators in the Compact; and (6) elect the Commission's Officers.

Portions Closed to the Public:  Executive Session, if deemed necessary, 
will be announced at the meeting.

Contact Person for More Information:  Richard R. Janati, Pennsylvania 
Staff member on the Commission, at 717-787-2163.

Richard R. Janati,
PA Staff Member on the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-21242 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 0000-00-P
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JEANETTE BURNEY SMITH

No. 7213SC832

(Filed 20 December 1972)

Appeal by defendant from *Hall, Judge,*14 August 1972 Session of Superior Court held in Bladen County.

Defendant was indicted for murder. The jury returned a verdict of guilty of voluntary manslaughter. Judgment imposing a prison sentence not less than four nor more than ten years was entered. Defendant was represented at trial and on appeal by court appointed counsel.

*Attorney General Robert Morgan by Thomas E. Kane, Assistant Attorney General for the State.*

*Moore & Melvin by Reuben L. Moore, Jr., for defendant appellant.*

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant’s counsel states that, except for the admission of certain exhibits, he is unable to discover prejudicial error in the trial and urges that the court scrutinize the record to determine if error appears. The exhibits, which were introduced over defendant’s objections, were relevant and their admission into evidence did not constitute prejudicial error. We have reviewed the record and find no prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Britt and Parker concur.
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 21.1

                               SUBSIDIARIES OF ACL


     American Commercial Barge Line LLC
     American Commercial Lines International LLC
     American Commercial Terminals LLC
     American Commercial Terminals - Memphis LLC
     ACBL Argentina, Ltd.
     ACBL Castle Harbour Ltd.
     ACBL de Venezuela, C.A.
     ACBL Hidrovias S.A.
     ACBL Hidrovias, Ltd.
     ACBL Venezuela, Ltd.
     ACL Capital Corp.
     ACL Venezuela, Ltd.
     Bolivar Terminal Company
     Breen TAS LLC
     Bullard TAS LLC
     Garven, C.A.
     Houston Fleet LLC
     Jeffboat LLC
     Jeffco, Ltd.
     Lemont Harbor & Fleeting Services LLC
     Louisiana Dock Company LLC
     Global Materials Services LLC
     Orinoco TASA LLC
     Orinoco TASV LLC
     River Terminal Properties LP
     Shelton TAS LLC
     Venco, Ltd.
     Waterway Communications System LLC


                                      100
Exhibit 32.2

              SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Richard E. Kurtenbach,  Chief Accounting Officer of Rancher Energy Corp. (the
Company),  certify,  that  pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of
the United States Code:

         (1) The  Company's  Quarterly  Report  on Form  10-Q for the  quarterly
period ended  September  30,  2009,  as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (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)  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.


/s/ Richard E. Kurtenbach
-----------------------------
Richard E. Kurtenbach
Chief Accounting Officer
February  19, 2010
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

J.J., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, PROCESSING & 

DISTRIBUTION CENTER, North Houston, TX,

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0135

Issued: November 24, 2020

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On November 3, 2020 appellant filed an appeal from an April 15, 2020 merit decision of 

the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 21-0135.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act.1 

For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s review 

authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of OWCP’s 

decision.2

The 180th day following the April 15, 2020 decision was October 12, 2020. As appellant 

did not file an appeal with the Board until November 3, 2020, more than 180 days after the

April 15, 2020 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 21-0135 is 

untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not offered 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).

2

Id. at § 501.3(e).
2

a reason to explain the failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

establish compelling circumstances.

The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date 

of their issuance.”

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-0135 is dismissed.

Issued: November 24, 2020

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

3

Id. at § 501.6(d).
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

D.B., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Elmhurst, IL, Employer 

_________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0075

Issued: December 17, 2020

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant1

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Deputy Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On October 23, 2020 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a

September 24, 2020 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). 

The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 21-0075.

In a letter dated and received December 9, 2020, counsel requested that the appeal be 

dismissed.

The Board has duly considered the matter and concludes that counsel’s request for the 

dismissal of the appeal should be granted. Accordingly, 

 

1

In all cases in which a representative has been authorized in a matter before the Board, no claim for a fee for 

legal or other service performed on appeal before the Board is valid unless approved by the Board. 

20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e). No contract for a stipulated fee or on a contingent fee basis will be approved by the Board.

Id. An attorney or representative’s collection of a fee without the Board’s approval may constitute a misdemeanor, 

subject to fine or imprisonment for up to one year or both. Id.; see also 18 U.S.C. § 292. Demands for payment of 

fees to a representative, prior to approval by the Board, may be reported to appropriate authorities for investigation.
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT appellant’s request for the dismissal of the appeal 

is granted. The appeal docketed as No. 21-0075 is dismissed.

Issued: December 17, 2020

Washington, DC

Christopher J. Godfrey, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5076 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the disclosure 

of the names of individuals who are granted amnesty from criminal 

prosecution by the Internal Revenue Service. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 20, 2010 

Mr. BISHOP of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require 

the disclosure of the names of individuals who are granted amnesty from criminal prosecution by 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stop Offshore Bad 

5 Actors Act of 2010’’. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5076 IH

1 SEC. 2. DISCLOSURE OF THE NAMES OF INDIVIDUALS WHO 

2 ARE GRANTED AMNESTY FROM CRIMINAL 

3 PROSECUTION BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE 

4 SERVICE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 77 of the Internal Rev6 enue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 

7 following new section: 

8 ‘‘SEC. 7529. DISCLOSURE OF THE NAMES OF INDIVIDUALS 

9 WHO ARE GRANTED AMNESTY FROM CRIMI10 NAL PROSECUTION BY THE INTERNAL REV11 ENUE SERVICE. 

12 ‘‘Not later than 60 days after the close of each cal13 endar year, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Reg14 ister the names of individuals who have been granted am15 nesty or immunity from criminal prosecution by the Inter16 nal Revenue Service during the preceding calendar year.’’. 

17 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

18 for such chapter 77 is amended by adding at the end the 

19 following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 7529. Disclosure of the names of individuals who are granted amnesty 

from criminal prosecution by the internal revenue service.’’. 

20 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

21 this section shall apply to amnesty granted after the date 

22 of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 10, 2015

No. 04-15-00769-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.G.R., et al children,

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-09-0581-CVW

Honorable Melissa Uram-Degerolami, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant seeks to appeal from a final order terminating her parental rights. An appeal 

from such an order is accelerated. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405. The trial court signed 

the final order of termination on October 8, 2015. Because this is an accelerated appeal, the 

notice of appeal was due on October 28, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b) (requiring notice of 

appeal to be filed within twenty days after the judgment is signed in an accelerated appeal); see 

also TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405(c) (filing of a motion for new trial does not extend the 

appellate deadline). A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was therefore due 

on November 14, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3 (providing a fifteen-day grace period after the 

deadline for filing notice of appeal). Appellant filed her notice of appeal on November 11, 2015, 

within the fifteen-day grace period allowed for filing a motion for extension of time to file the 

notice of appeal; however, no motion for extension was filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3.

A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good 

faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 but within the fifteen-day 

grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. 

Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing predecessor to Rule 26). However, the 

appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely 

manner. See id.; TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C).

It is therefore ORDERED that appellant file, within ten (10) days from the date of this 

order, a response presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a 

timely manner. If appellant fails to respond within the time provided, the appeal will be 

dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).
All appellate deadlines in this matter are suspended until further order of this court.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 10th day of December, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification of President and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to****18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ares Capital Corporation (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Michael J. Arougheti, as President of the Company, and Penni F. Roll, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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 his or her 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.

 
| Dated: November 5, 2012  |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
|                          |   |
| /s/ Michael J. Arougheti      |   |
| Michael J. Arougheti          |   |
| President                     |   |
| (Principal Executive Officer) |   |
|                          |   |
| Dated: November 5, 2012  |   |
|                          |   |
| /s/ Penni F. Roll             |   |
| Penni F. Roll                 |   |
| Chief Financial Officer       |   |
| (Principal 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 Ares Capital Corporation and will be retained by Ares Capital Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. EDSON B. MICKLES

No. 7026SC632

(Filed 18 November 1970)

On *certiorari*to review trial before *Falls, J.,*27 October 1969 Session, Mecklenburg Superior Court.

Defendant was charged with the offenses of felonious breaking or entering, and felonious larceny. Defendant was tried jointly with James Leon Kendrick whose appeal has been considered by opinion filed this same date. The facts as stated there apply equally to this appeal.

The State’s evidence tended to show that during the early hours of the morning of 13 August 1969 the Oaklawn Super Market was broken into and a quantity of merchandise was stolen therefrom. Charges of felonious breaking or entering and felonious larceny were also lodged against James Leon Kendrick and Billy Frank Anderson. Mickles, the defendant involved in this appeal, and Kendrick were placed on trial together, and Anderson testified for the State. Kendrick and Mickles offered no evidence.

The testimony of Anderson tended to show that Mickles broke and entered the Oaklawn Super Market; that he, Anderson, also went in the building; that Kendrick was standing on the other side of the street; that Anderson and Mickles handed two bags of items taken from the store to Kendrick; and the three then went to an apartment nearby.

The jury found Mickles guilty as charged.

*Attorney General Morgan by Staff Attorney Blackburn for the State.*

*Thomas R. Cannon for defendant.*

*735BROCK, Judge.

It appears that the writ of *certiorari*was improvidently issued in this case. However, we have carefully reviewed the record and defendant’s assignments of error, and we conclude that defendant had a fair trial free from prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Morris and Graham concur.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-17-0000020

30-JAN-2018

08:01 AM
<PAGE>


                        EPIC RESORTS AND SUBSIDIARIES(1)

Epic Resorts, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Epic Resorts - Palm Springs Marquis Villas, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company
Epic Resorts - Westpark Resort, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Epic Resorts - Scottsdale Links Resort, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company
London Bridge Resort, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Epic Resorts - Hilton Head, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Epic Resorts - Afton Resort, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Daytona Beach Regency, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership
Resort Management, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Resort Investment, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Epic Capital Corp., a Delaware corporation
Epic Warrant Co., a Delaware corporation
Epic Receivables, Inc., a Delaware corporation
Epic Membership Corp., a Delaware corporation
Epic Travel, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Epic Resorts - Vacation Showplace, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
Epic Resorts Management, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company(2)
Epic Marketing, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company(3)
Epic Vacation Club, a Delaware non-profit corporation
Epic Master Funding Corporation, a Delaware corporation(4)
Epic Resorts - Planters Quarters, Inc., a Delaware corporation
Epic Receivables 1999, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company


--------------------------
(1)ALL ARE DIRECT SUBSIDIARIES OF EPIC RESORTS, LLC EXCEPT DAYTONA BEACH
REGENCY, LTD.
(2)PROPERTY MANAGEMENT ARM OF EPIC VACATION CLUB
(3)ONE PERCENT INTEREST HELD BY EPIC MEMBERSHIP CORP.
(4)SPECIAL PURPOSE CORPORATION FOR MORTGAGE AND/OR CLUB RECEIVABLES
<PAGE>

Daytona Beach Regency Association, Inc., a Florida non-profit corporation(5)
Resort Association, Inc., an Arizona non-profit corporation
Scottsdale Links Condominium Association, an Arizona non-profit corporation
Island Links Resort Owners Association, Inc., a South Carolina non-profit
corporation
Palm Springs Marquis Villas Owners Association, a California non-profit Mutual
Benefit Corporation
Desert Paradise Resort Owners Association, a Nevada Non-profit corporation


--------------------------
(5)NON-PROFIT CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION
Electronically Filed 

Supreme Court 

SCAD-11-0000032 

18-APR-2011 

08:36 AM 

SCAD-11-0000032
 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I 

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,
 

vs.
 

FRANK M. FERNANDEZ, Respondent.
 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
 

(ODC 07-172-8632, 08-004-8647, 09-016-8739, 09-017-8740,


09-084-8807, 09-085-8808, 09-087-8810, 09-088-8811, 09-089-8812,


09-090-8813, 10-019-8853, 10-020-8854, 10-021-8855, 10-022-8856,


10-023-8857, 10-024-8858, 10-040-8874, 10-056-8890, 10-090-8924,


11-003-8927, 11-004-8928)
 

ORDER OF INTERIM SUSPENSION
 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama and Duffy, JJ.,


Circuit Judge Chang in place of Acoba, J., recused and


Circuit Judge Kim, in place of Intermediate Court of Appeals


Chief Judge Nakamura, recused)
 

Upon consideration of the Office of Disciplinary
 

Counsel’s petition for the interim suspension of Respondent Frank
 

M. Fernandez from the practice of law pursuant to Rule 2.23 of 

the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai'i (RSCH), 

Respondent Fernandez’s memorandum in response to our order to 

show cause, and the record, it appears Petitioner has presented 

“sufficient evidence demonstrating that an attorney has committed 

a violation of the Hawai'i Rules of Professional Conduct and 

poses a substantial threat of serious harm to the public” and 

Respondent Fernandez has failed to show good cause as to why his 

license to practice law in this jurisdiction should not be 
immediately suspended pending the outcome of disciplinary
 

proceedings. Therefore,
 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Fernandez is
 

suspended, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.23(a)(3), pending the outcome
 

of the disciplinary proceedings and until further order of this
 

court. This order is effective upon entry. In view of the fact
 

that some pending complaints date back to 2006, it is the court’s
 

expectation that the investigation will be completed as
 

expeditiously as possible. 


IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order imposing interim
 

suspension on Respondent Fernandez shall constitute a suspension
 

of Respondent Fernandez for purposes of RSCH Rule 2.16, and
 

Respondent Fernandez shall comply with the requirements of that
 

rule.
 

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk shall forthwith
 

distribute a copy of this order to all judges. Distribution may
 

be by electronic mail.
 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, April 18, 2011. 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
 

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
 

/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.
 

/s/ Gary W.B. Chang
 

/s/ Glenn J. Kim
 

2
Exhibit
32.1




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 Implant Sciences Corporation., a
Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year
ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), I, Glenn D. Bolduc, Chief Executive Officer,
President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby 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.




/s/
      Glenn D. BolducGlenn
      D. BolducChief
      Executive Officer, President and Chief Financial
OfficerDate:
      February 6, 2009







This
certification accompanies each report of the Company on Form 10-Q and Form 10-K
pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the
extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the
Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.




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