alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Presidential Documents

59207 

Federal Register 

Vol. 70, No. 195 

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 

Title 3— 

The President 

Proclamation 7940 of October 6, 2005 

German-American Day, 2005 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

German Americans have played an important role in establishing America 

as a land where liberty is protected for all of its citizens. Each year on 

German-American Day, we celebrate the contributions the millions of Americans of German descent have made to our great Nation. 

Among the early German immigrants, many saw America as a beacon of 

religious freedom and an opportunity for an improved standard of living. 

German immigrants helped pioneer the first American colony at Jamestown. 

Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg served as the first Speaker of the House 

of Representatives; in this role, he certified the final version of the Bill 

of Rights. 

Throughout our country’s history, men and women of German descent have 

worn the uniform of the United States military to defend our country’s 

freedom. Among these were Admiral Chester Nimitz, Commander in Chief 

of the United States Pacific Fleet during World War II, and General Dwight 

D. Eisenhower, who went on to become one of America’s Presidents of 

German ancestry. Today, German-American troops continue to serve proudly 

in our Nation’s Armed Forces. 

German Americans have enriched many other aspects of American life. 

Albert Einstein’s advancements in the field of physics help define our understanding of the universe. Theodor Seuss Geisel, more commonly known 

as Dr. Seuss, has captivated the imaginations of children for generations 

with his timeless classics. Baseball great Lou Gehrig’s courage on and off 

the field continues to inspire the American spirit more than 60 years after 

his death. 

On German-American Day, we also honor the important friendship between 

the United States and Germany. Our nations share beliefs in human rights 

and dignity, and on this day, I join all Americans in celebrating the bonds 

that tie our two nations and in reaffirming the importance of our continuing 

friendship. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States 

of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution 

and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 6, 2005, as 

German-American Day. I encourage all Americans to celebrate the many 

contributions German Americans have made to our Nation’s liberty and 

prosperity. 

59208 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 11, 2005 / Presidential Documents 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixth day of 

October, in the year of our Lord two thousand five, and of the Independence 

of the United States of America the two hundred and thirtieth. 

W 

[FR Doc. 05–20485 

Filed 10–7–05; 9:28 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5085 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to eliminate for 5 years 

the limitation on expensing certain depreciable business assets. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 20, 2010 

Mr. OWENS 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 eliminate 

for 5 years the limitation on expensing certain depreciable business assets. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FIVE-YEAR ELIMINATION OF LIMITATION ON 

4 EXPENSING CERTAIN DEPRECIABLE BUSI5 NESS ASSETS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (7) of section 179(b) 

7 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read 

8 as follows: 

9 ‘‘(7) FIVE-YEAR REPEAL ON LIMITATIONS.— 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5085 IH

1 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subpara2 graph (B), in the case of any taxable year be3 ginning after December 31, 2009, and before 

4 January 1, 2015, this section shall be applied 

5 without regard to paragraphs (1) and (2). 

6 ‘‘(B) HIRING REQUIREMENT.—For pur7 poses of this paragraph— 

8 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—In any case in 

9 which the deduction which would (but for 

10 this subparagraph) be allowed for the tax11 able year exceeds $250,000, such excess 

12 shall be allowed as a deduction only to the 

13 extent the taxpayer hires for such taxable 

14 year at least 1 qualified full-time employee 

15 for each $100,000 of such excess. 

16 ‘‘(ii) QUALIFIED FULL-TIME EM17 PLOYEE.—For purposes of this section, the 

18 term ‘qualified full-time employee’ means 

19 an employee who— 

20 ‘‘(I) during the taxable year is 

21 employed by the employer on average 

22 at least 30 hours per week, 

23 ‘‘(II) has not been employed for 

24 more than 40 hours during the 60-day 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5085 IH

1 period ending on the date such indi2 vidual begins such employment, 

3 ‘‘(III) is not employed by the em4 ployer to replace another employee of 

5 such employer unless such other em6 ployee separated from employment 

7 voluntarily or for cause, and 

8 ‘‘(IV) is not an individual de9 scribed in section 51(i)(1).’’. 

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

11 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

12 December 31, 2009. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 204 (Monday, October 24, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 61490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21199]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Applications of Platinum Airlines, Inc. for Certificate Authority

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of Order to Show Cause (Order 2005-10-13); Dockets OST-
2005-21286 and OST-2005-21287.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is directing all interested 
persons to show cause why it should not issue orders finding Platinum 
Airlines, Inc. fit, willing, and able, and awarding it certificates of 
public convenience and necessity to engage in interstate and foreign 
charter air transportation of persons, property and mail.

DATES: Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than 
October 31, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to objections should be filed in 
Dockets OST-2005-21286 and OST-2005-21287 and addressed to U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, (M-30, Room PL-401), 
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, and should be served 
upon the parties listed in Attachment A to the order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vanessa R. Balgobin, Air Carrier 
Fitness Division (X-56, Room 6401), U.S. Department of Transportation, 
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-9721.

    Dated: October 17, 2005.
Susan McDermott,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 05-21199 Filed 10-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 21.1


                              SUBSIDIARIES OF ACL

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Names of Subsidiaries                                Jurisdiction of Organization
---------------------                                ----------------------------
<S>                                                  <C>
ACBL de Venezuela, C.A.                                      Venezuela
ACBL do Brasil Holdings, S.A.                                Uruguay
ACBL Dominicana S.A.                                         Dominican
ACBL Hidrovias, Ltd.                                         Bermuda
ACBL Liquid Sales LLC                                        Delaware
ACBL Riverside Terminals C.A.                                Venezuela
ACBL Venezuela, Ltd.                                         Bermuda
ACL Capital Corp.                                            Delaware
Amazonas Holdings, S.A.                                      Uruguay
American Commercial Barge Line LLC                           Delaware
American Commercial Lines Funding Corporation                Delaware
American Commercial Lines International LLC                  Delaware
American Commercial Logistics LLC                            Delaware
American Commercial Terminals LLC                            Delaware
American Commercial Terminals - Memphis LLC                  Delaware
Houston Fleet LLC                                            Delaware
Jeffboat LLC                                                 Delaware
Lemont Harbor & Fleeting Services LLC                        Delaware
Louisiana Dock Company LLC                                   Delaware
Orinoco TASA LLC                                             Delaware
Orinoco TASV LLC                                             Delaware
River Terminal Properties, L.P.                              Tennessee
Rylend, S.A.                                                 Uruguay
</TABLE>
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

R.P., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, USNS WALLY 

SCHIRRA, Norfolk, VA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0192

Issued: December 17, 2020

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

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 November 16, 2020 appellant filed a timely appeal from a September 29, 2020 merit 

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

Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 21-0192.

In a letter dated December 7, 2020 and received on December 8, 2020, appellant 

requested that the appeal be dismissed.

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

dismissal of the appeal should be granted. Accordingly, 
2

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

is granted. The appeal docketed as No. 21-0192 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
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WILLIAM ROUNTREE

No. 755SC646

(Filed 19 November 1975)

Appeal by defendant from *Fountain, Judge.*Judgment entered 4 March 1975 in Superior Court, New Hanover- County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 10 November 1975.

*Attorney General Edmisten by Assistant Attorney General James E. Magner, Jr. for the State.*

*Jay D. Hockenbury for defendant appellant.*

MORRIS, PARKER and MARTIN, Judges.

No error.
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROGER WALLS

No. 7222SC803

(Filed 20 December 1972)

Criminal Law § 155.5 — failure to docket record in apt time — dismissal of appeal

Appeal is subject to dismissal where the record on appeal was not docketed within the time allowed by an order which had extended the time for docketing. Court of Appeals Rules 5 and 48.

Appeal by defendant from *Wood, Judge,*24 April 1972 Session of Superior Court held in Davidson County.

*128Defendant was charged in a bill of indictment with (1) the felony of breaking or entering a motor vehicle with intent to commit larceny therein, (2) larceny after feloniously breaking or entering a motor vehicle, and (3) receiving stolen goods knowing them to have been feloniously stolen.

One Billy Ray Davis testified for the State that he, the defendant, and one Brown went into the parking lot at the Young-Hinkle plant for the purpose of stealing something of value from one of the cars. They unlocked a car by inserting a piece of wire between the door windows and raising the door lock. They took two tapes from the car and had started loosening the bolts on the tape player when they saw someone watching them from the roof of the building. All of them ran away.

Deputy Epley testified that he questioned Davis shortly thereafter, and the deputy testified to substantially the same statements as given by Davis in court. In addition, the deputy testified that he ran a license check on the automobile, and determined that it belonged to Mr. Thomas Snyder. Deputy Epley further testified that he observed the tape player lying on the floorboard of the car. He also found the two tapes in a nearby barn where Davis said he had thrown them when he ran from the scene.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty of breaking and entering an automobile as charged in the (1st count) bill of indictment. Defendant appealed.

*Attorney General Morgan, by Assistant Attorney General Conely, for the State.*

*William B. Mills, for the defendant.*

BROCK, Judge.

The judgment appealed from in this case is dated 27 April 1972, and appeal entries are dated the same date as the judgment. Defendant obtained a proper order extending time within which to docket the record on appeal in the Court of Appeals to, and including, the maximum time allowed under Rule 5, Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals. The maximum time expired on 24 September 1972; however, the record on appeal was not docketed in this Court until 2 October 1972. For failure to comply with the rules of this Court, the appeal is subject to dismissal. Rule 48, Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals.

*129Nevertheless, we have examined defendant’s properly preserved exceptions and assignments of error. Also, we have reviewed the record proper. In our opinion defendant had a fair trial, free from prejudicial error.

Appeal dismissed.

Judges Campbell and Graham concur.
**Exhibit 31.2**I, Jeffrey T. Soukup, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PlanetOut Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annualreport is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:November 11, 2005          /s/ Jeffrey T. Soukup   Jeffrey T. Soukup   Chief Financial Officer  
Page 35
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4825 

AN ACT 

To direct unused appropriations for Members’ Representational Allowances to be deposited in the Treasury and 

used for deficit reduction or to reduce the Federal debt. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4825 EH

1 SECTION 1. REQUIRING AMOUNTS REMAINING IN MEM2 BERS’ REPRESENTATIONAL ALLOWANCES TO 

3 BE USED FOR DEFICIT REDUCTION OR TO RE4 DUCE THE FEDERAL DEBT. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi6 sion of law, any amounts appropriated for Members’ Rep7 resentational Allowances for the House of Representatives 

8 for a fiscal year which remain after all payments are made 

9 under such Allowances for the year shall be deposited in 

10 the Treasury and used for deficit reduction, except that 

11 in the case of a fiscal year for which there is no Federal 

12 budget deficit, such amounts shall be used to reduce the 

13 Federal debt (in such manner as the Secretary of the 

14 Treasury considers appropriate). 

15 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall apply with 

16 respect to fiscal year 2011 and each succeeding fiscal year. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 17, 

2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4825 

AN ACT 

To direct unused appropriations for Members’ Repduce the Federal debt. Treasury and used for deficit reduction or to re- resentational Allowances to be deposited in the
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Aventine Renewable Energy Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Ronald H. Miller, ChiefExecutive Officer of AventineRenewable Energy Holdings, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C.Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatto the best of my knowledge and belief:

 

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

 

(2)           The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to AventineRenewable Energy Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Aventine Renewable Energy Holdings, Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

 

 
|   | /s/ Ronald H. Miller    |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Ronald H. Miller        |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   | August 10, 2009    |

 

1

----
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 6- 39 28

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Cl ayto n Walk er ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt v. Jo se ph Harm on , in di vi du al cap aci ty; Bla ckHil ls Fu gi ti ve TaskFo rce

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ctof S ou th Dako ta- Rap idCit y

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: May 25, 2 01 7 Fi le d: Ju ne 2, 2 01 7 [Unpubl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circu itJu dg es .

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM. Cl ayto n W al ke r ap pe al s fo ll owi ng th e d is tri ctco ur t’s di sm is sa l of his pr o se 1 ci vi l co m pl ai nt . Hav in g care fu ll y rev ie wed th e reco rd an d th e pa rti es ’ br ie fs , we fin d The Hon or ab le Je ffre y L. Vik en , Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r 1 th e Dis tri ctof S ou th Dako ta .no erro r warra nt in g rev ers al . W e th eref or e affi rm th e jud gm en t e n t e r e d in fav or of de fen da nt s. See 8t h C ir. R . 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2 -
##### 



Exhibit 10.15
 
       Representations
 Fees and Expenses




---



##### 



Defined Terms
 Limited Effect
 GOVERNING LAW
 Counterparts




---



##### 



NEW CENTURY FUNDING SB-1By: Christiana Bank & Trust Company, not inits individual capacity but solely as owner trusteeBy:
    
    /s/ James M. YoungName: James M. YoungTitle:   Assistant Vice PresidentCITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS REALTY CORP.By:
    
    /s/ Bobbie TheivakumaranName: Bobbie TheivakumaranTitle:   Authorized Agent
  NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATIONBy:
    
    /s/ Kevin CloydName: Kevin CloydTitle:   EVPNEW CENTURY FINANCIAL CORPORATION(f/k/a New Century REIT, Inc.)By:
    
    /s/ Kevin CloydName: Kevin CloydTitle:   EVPBy:
    
    /s/ Brad A. MorriceName: Brad A. MorriceTitle:   President and COO
STATE of North Carolina v. Robert Dwayne LEWIS

No. 140PA18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Kathryn L. VandenBerg, Assistant Appellant Defender, for Lewis, Robert Dwayne.

Milind Kumar Dongre, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Kristy M. Newton, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 1st of June 2018 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:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).