alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 9, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 68101]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22329]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-58,125]


S. Lichtenberg and Company Inc., Samsons Mfg. Division 
Waynesboro, GA; Notice of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on October 13, 2005 in response to a 
petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at S. 
Lichtenberg and Company Inc., Samsons Mfg. Division, Waynesboro, 
Georgia. The workers are engaged in the production of curtains and 
drapes.
    The Department has determined that the petitioning group of workers 
is covered by an active certification, TA-W-53,381A which expires on 
December 4, 2005. Consequently, further investigation in this case 
would serve no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, D.C., this 20th day of October, 2005.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 05-22329 Filed 11-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P
EXHIBIT 23 ---- CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


    We  consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual
Report (Form 10-K) of Intergraph Corporation and subsidiaries of
our  report dated January 30, 1997, included in the 1996  Annual
Report to Shareholders of Intergraph Corporation.

    Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of
Intergraph  Corporation listed in Item 14(a)(2).  This  schedule
is   the  responsibility  of  the  Company's  management.    Our
responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits.  In
our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above,
when  considered  in relation to the basic financial  statements
taken  as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects  the
information set forth herein.

    We  also  consent to the incorporation by reference  in  the
Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-25880) pertaining to the
Stock  Bonus  Plan dated December 22, 1988; in the  Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-53849) pertaining to the Intergraph Corporation
1992  Stock  Option Plan dated May 27, 1994; in the Registration
Statement  (Form S-8 No. 33-57211) pertaining to the  Assumption
of  Options under the InterCAP Graphics Systems, Inc. 1989 Stock
Option  Plan  and 1994 Nonqualified Stock  Option  Program dated
January 10, 1995; in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-59621)
pertaining to the 1995 Intergraph Corporation Employee Stock Purchase
Plan dated May 26, 1995; and in the related Prospectuses of our report
dated  January  30,  1997 with  respect  to  the  consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Intergraph Corporation  and
subsidiaries included or incorporated by reference in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1996.


                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Birmingham, Alabama
March 24, 1997
#### COCA-COLA CO. v. COBLE, SEC. OF REVENUE

No. 157.

Case below: 33 N.C. App. 124.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 14 July 1977.
We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the

prosecution and determine whether "any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." Jackson ix Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979) (emphasis omitted); Mitchell v. State, 124 Nev. 807, 816, 192 P.3d 721, 727 (2008). "NRS 205.090 provides, among other things, that any person who (1) passes or attempts to pass, as true and genuine, a forged or false instrument, (2) knowing it to be forged or false, (3) with intent to defraud, is guilty of forgery." Patin v. Sheriff, Clark Cnty., 92 Nev. 673, 674, 557 P.2d 708, 708 (1976).

The jury heard testimony that Anderson admitted to Police Officer Mario Perez, Jr., that he knew that the checks were bad and that they were going to cash them. Valeria Gonzalez testified that she, Anderson, and an unidentified male met with a third unidentified male. The third male handed Anderson a stack of papers and told him "[t]hat he would be able to cash the checks at a Walmart, this stack, and then tomorrow he would be good to cash the others." 2 They then traveled to the Bighorn Casino, where Anderson handed her a check and told her to cash it. Gonzales saw her name and address on the check, but she did not recognize the name of the company that was identified as the drawee. She knew that it was not her check and that she would not be able to cash it because she did not work for that company And, when she attempted to cash the check, she was detained by security guards. The guards called the police and stated that they had placed a female in custody for trying to

2 The record indicates that this statement was admitted pursuant to NRS 51.035(3)(e) (a statement offered against a party that was made by a coconspirator of the party during the course and in furtherance of a conspiracy is not hearsay).

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2
(0) 1947A 

### e

# &vitae Pickering

Saitta cash a bad check. The police impounded the check and it was later admitted into evidence.

We conclude that a rational juror could reasonably infer from this evidence that the check Anderson attempted to pass was a forged or false instrument. See 

### NRS 205.090; NRS 205.110; see also Doyle v. State, 

### 112 Nev. 879, 892, 921 P.2d 901, 910(1996) (describing the independent proof necessary to satisfy the corpus delicti rule), overruled on other grounds by Kaczmarek v. State, 

### 120 Nev. 314, 333, 91 P.3d 16, 29 (2004). It is for the jury to determine the weight and credibility to give conflicting testimony, and the jury's verdict will not be disturbed on appeal where, as here, substantial evidence supports the verdict. See Bolden v. State, 

### 97 Nev. 71, 73, 624 P.2d 20, 20 (1981). Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

J.

cc: Hon. Jessie Elizabeth Walsh, District Judge Michael H. Schwarz Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 

### 3
(0) 1947A 

### e
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-1301

_____________________________

TERRY WILLIAMS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Gadsden County.

Robert R. Wheeler, Judge.

May 6, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

BILBREY, NORDBY, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Kathleen Pafford, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Robert “Charlie” Lee,

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-60549 Summary Calendar

TEODORO BARRERA-GARCIA, Petitioner,

versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

- - - - - - - - - - Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

(A39 295 979)

- - - - - - - - - - May 17, 1996 Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Teodoro Barrera-Garcia, a Mexican citizen, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Barrera argues that the BIA failed to exercise independent judgment in reviewing the immigration judge’s (IJ’s) decision and abused its discretion by denying Barrera him a waiver of deportation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c), § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The BIA exercised itsNo. 95-60549 - 2 - independent judgment in reviewing the denial of waiver and did not abuse its discretion in denying relief from deportation. See Ghassan v. INS , 972 F.2d 631, 635-36 (5th Cir. 1992); DiazResendez v. INS , 960 F.2d 493, 495 (5th Cir. 1992). Barrera also argues that one of the judges sitting on the BIA did not exercise impartial judgment because he was a junior judge to the immigration judge whose order the BIA was reviewing. Barrera presents nothing other than his dissatisfaction with the BIA’s decision as evidence of the judge’s bias. To the extent that Barrera is raising new arguments in his reply brief concerning due process and C.F.R. violations regarding this judicial-bias argument, Barrera is prohibited from raising such issues. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). The petition for review is DENIED.
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 1 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 2 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 3 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 4 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 5 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 6 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 7 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 8 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 9 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 10 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 11 of 12
Case 1:07-cr-00357-CM Document 19 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 12 of 12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

---------------------------------- -x 

IN RE: Fosamax Troducta Liability : YIlT.1 No. 1789 

Lit igat icn 

1 : 06-md-1789 (JFK) ---.--- - --------------- ---x Order 

I'hjs Document R~lates tu: All Actlons : 

---------------- - S 

JOHN F. KEENAN, United States District Judge: 

gefendant MFY-~k has requested that I hear the rrcltrion to 

cornrjel w'rllch PLaintiffs flled sr. April 18, 2CG8 tefore Magistrate 

Ju,~~P Francis. The mct lcjn 2pprars q,rl L ai~~ :ji ECL'\,-YT~; i 95~~3 t]-.ily 

may nave a broad inpact on this MDL and, therefore, T would 

prefer t3 resolve the motion. Per the parties' stipulated 

briefing sched~le, Mtrck' s response is due on May ;2, 2G08 and 

Plaintiff's reply is due an May 19, 2033 

SO ORDERED. 

Dated: New York, New York 

April 24, 2008 

,/ JOHN F. KEENAN 

United States District Judge 

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 23 Filed 04/25/2008 Page 1 of 1
# USS Oklahoma Sailor Accounted for from WWII (Schleiter, W.)

/ Published Feb. 5, 2024
Washington, 
The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) announced today that Fireman First Class (F1c) Walter F. Schleiter, 22, of Massillon, Ohio, killed during World War II, was accounted for on May 18, 2018.

On Dec. 7, 1941, Schleiter was assigned to the battleship USS *Oklahoma*, which was moored at Ford Island, Pearl Harbor, when the ship was attacked by Japanese aircraft. The USS *Oklahoma* sustained multiple torpedo hits, which caused it to quickly capsize. The attack on the ship resulted in the deaths of 429 crewmen, including Schleiter.

From December 1941 to June 1944, Navy personnel recovered the remains of the deceased crew, which were subsequently interred in the Halawa and Nu’uanu Cemeteries.

In September 1947, tasked with recovering and identifying fallen U.S. personnel in the Pacific Theater, members of the American Graves Registration Service (AGRS) disinterred the remains of U.S. casualties from the two cemeteries and transferred them to the Central Identification Laboratory at Schofield Barracks. The laboratory staff was only able to confirm the identifications of 35 men from the USS *Oklahoma* at that time. The AGRS subsequently buried the unidentified remains in 46 plots at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific (NMCP), known as the Punchbowl, in Honolulu. In October 1949, a military board classified those who could not be identified as non-recoverable, including Schleiter.

Between June and November 2015, DPAA personnel exhumed the USS *Oklahoma* Unknowns from the Punchbowl for analysis.

To identify Schleiter’s remains, scientists from DPAA used dental and anthropological analysis. Additionally, scientists from the Armed Forces Medical Examiner System used mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analysis.

Schleiter’s name is recorded in the Courts of the Missing at the Punchbowl, along with the others who are missing from WWII. A rosette will be placed next to his name to indicate he has been accounted for.

Schleiter will be buried on April 11, 2024, in Bridgeville, Pennsylvania.

For family and funeral information, contact the US Navy Casualty office at (800) 443-9298.

DPAA is grateful to the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of the Navy for their partnership in this mission.

For additional information on the Defense Department’s mission to account for Americans who went missing while serving our country, visit the DPAA website at www.dpaa.mil, find us on social media at www.facebook.com/dodpaa or https://www.linkedin.com/company/defense-pow-mia-accounting-agency.

Schleiter’s personnel profile can be viewed at https://dpaa-mil.sites.crmforce.mil/dpaaProfile?id=a0Jt0000000XgTcEAK.
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 24 Filed 09/26/2007 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 24 Filed 09/26/2007 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 24 Filed 09/26/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:06-cv-00694-PKC Document 17-7 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cv-03327-DC Document 21 Filed 10/16/2007 Page 1 of 1
Skip to page content

United States Department of Labor

A to ZSite MapFAQsFormsAbout DOLContact UsEspañol

DOL HomeWHD

# DBRA Survey Information

## Quick Links

          - Surveys
          - Forms 
          - Help 
          - Regions 
          - Contact DBRA 
          - Related Links 
          - Accessibility 
          - Wage Determinations

 

 

 

 

 
| Active Surveys  |
|-----------------|
| Survey-Schedule | Survey Starts | Data-Collection-Completed | Survey-Results |

 Welcome to the  DBRA  Survey Information Page.  The Report of Construction Contractor's Wage         Rates (WD-10& form) is         your chance to have input into the determination of the prevailing wage         rates to be paid on federally financed or assisted construction projects         in your county.&  If you have any questions please see our Frequently         Asked Questions.

This Survey Information Page includes: 
        - Survey Schedule  - lists the surveys which      are scheduled to be conducted.
        - Survey Starts Page  - lists surveys currently      under way.
        - Data Collection Completed  - lists surveys      for which data collection has been completed and data are being analyzed,      clarified and verified.
        - Survey& Results  - lists the publication      date for completed  DBRA  surveys.
        - Memoranda 130 and 131  - assistance in determining      the construction type for Davis Bacon purposes.
        - Survey Definitions  - defines terms and to      help interpret the syntax in survey schedules.
        - State Abbreviations  - A list of state postal      abbreviations for reference.

**Please note:** The results of these surveys will determine     wage rates to be paid on future federally financed or assisted projects     subject to the Davis-Bacon and related Acts.& It is necessary that     we receive all wage data for projects under construction or completed during     the survey time-frame.

 

**For Workers**

**For Employers**

**For States**

**How to File a Complaint**

**News Room**

**About WHD**

**Contact Us**

**Email Alerts**

Freedom of Information ActPrivacy & Security StatementDisclaimersImportant Website NoticesPlug-Ins Used on DOL.gov

U.S. Department of LaborTTYContact Us
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP     Document 14      Filed 09/12/2007     Page 1 of 1
# C_2007125EN.01000301.xml

| 6.6.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 125/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 125/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4636 — Teleperformance/The Phone House SAS/The Phone House Services Telecom)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 125/05)

On 4 May 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4636. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4636. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
<PAGE>
                                                                  Exhibit 99 (a)

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

In connection with the Annual Report of C-COR.net Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ending June 28, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David A. Woodle, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that, to 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 result of operations of the Company.

/s/ David A. Woodle
-------------------
David A. Woodle
Chief Executive Officer
September 26, 2002
Exhibit 32

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 Quarterly Report of Westar Energy, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the Report), which this certification accompanies, William B. Moore, in my capacity as Director, President and
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Mark A. Ruelle, in my capacity as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|      |  |                  |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                     
|----- |  | ---------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|      |  |                  |  | 
|Date: |  | October 29, 2009 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ William B. Moore                                                
|      |  |                  |  |  |  |     |  | William B. Moore Director, President and Chief Executive Officer    
|      |  |                  |  | 
|Date: |  | October 29, 2009 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Mark A. Ruelle                                                  
|      |  |                  |  |  |  |     |  | Mark A. Ruelle, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Case 1:07-cv-03314-GBD Document 41 Filed 02/19/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03314-GBD Document 41 Filed 02/19/2008 Page 2 of 2
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 05-22881  Filed 11-15-05; 12:20 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP     Document 44      Filed 05/19/2008     Page 1 of 1
U.S. Department of Labor Employment Standards Administration 

Office of Workers' Compensation Programs 

Division of Longshore and 

Harbor Workers' Compensation 

Washington, D.C. 20210 

Fi!e Number: 

DEC21$1 

Notice No. 78 

NOTICE TO INSURANCE CARRIERS AND SELF-INSURED EMPLOYERS UNDER THE 

LONGSHORE AND BARBOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION ACT 

SUBJECT: Revision of Forms LS-201, LS-202, LS-203 & LS-262 

Enclosed are copies of the recently revised Forms LS-201, LS202, LS-203 and LS-262 which are used under the Longshore and 

Harbor Workers' Compensation Act and its extensions, the Defense 

Base Act, the Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities Act and the 

Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. The revised forms now require 

that the Social Security Number of the person(s) claiming 

benefits be entered on the forms. 

Prior versions of these forms are now obsolete and should no 

longer be used. If you decide to print and stock these forms, 

the printed copies must conform in every respect to the enclosed 

originals. You may, however, purchase supplies from any of the 

following printing companies: 

Uniform Printing and Supply, Inc. 

30 Montgomery Street 

Jersey City, NJ 07302 

Paragon Graphics 

8131 West 10th Street 

Indianapolis, IN 46214 

Manhattan Stationary, Inc. 

385 Nordhoff Place 

Englewood, NJ 07631 

You may call this Office at Area Code (202) 219-8721 if you have 

. ;'hir ctor, 

l · Longshore and Harbor 

/ Workers' Compensation 

/~ 

the use or printing of these forms •
#### WAKE COUNTY HOSPITAL v. INDUSTRIAL COMM.

No. 95 PC.

Case below: 8 N.C. App. 259.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 14 July 1970.
Case 1:06-cv-14992-AKH Document 3 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1