alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 223 (Monday, November 21, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 70062]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22948]



[[Page 70062]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by December 
21, 2005.
    Title, Form, and OMB Number: Terminal and Transfer Facilities 
Descriptions; IWR Forms 1-9; OMB Control Number 0710-0007.
    Type of Request: Extension.
    Number of Respondents: 1,262.
    Responses Per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 1,262.
    Average Burden Per Response: Approximately 15 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 313.
    Needs and Uses: Data gathered and published as one of the 56 Port 
Series Reports, relating to terminals, transfer facilities, storage 
facilities, and intermodal transportation. This information is used in 
navigation, planning, safety, National Security, emergency operations, 
and general interest studies and activities. Respondents are terminal 
and transfer facility operators. These data are essential to the 
Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center in Exercising their enforcement 
and quality control responsibilities in the collection of data from 
vessel reporting companies.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit; Federal government; 
and state, local or tribal government.
    Frequency: Annually.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    OMB Desk Officer: Mr. James Laity.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Mr. Laity at the Office of Management and 
Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    DOD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings.
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD/Information Management 
Division, 1777 North Kent Street, RPN, Suite 11000, Arlington, VA 
22209-2133.

    Dated: November 14, 2005.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 05-22948 Filed 11-18-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
CONSENT OF EXPERT





Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F (the 40-F) of Platinum Group Metals Ltd. (the Company) for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2009 to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Annual Information Form (the AIF) and Managements Discussion and Analysis(MD&A) of the Company for the year then ended, which are incorporated by reference therein.



Each of the undersigned hereby consents to the references to, and the information derived from, the reports titled Revised Technical Report (Feasibility Study) Western Bushveld Joint Venture Project 1 (Elandsfontein and Frischgewaagd) dated June 10, 2009, Technical Report (Feasibility Study) Western Bushveld Joint Venture Project 1 (Elandsfontein and Frischgewaagd) dated July 7, 2008 and Competent Persons Report on Project 3 of the Western Bushveld Joint Venture (WBJV) Located on the Western Limb of the Bushveld Igneous Complex, South Africa dated June 9, 2008  and to the references, as applicable, to the undersigneds name in the 40-F, the AIF and the MD&A.





|                                                                                          | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Minxcon (Pty) Ltd

//signed//________
Charles J. Muller
Director

Date: November 27, 2009 | 
|                                                                                          |
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 21
                                                                      ----------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                            Percentage of 
                                    State or County of    Voting Securities
                                     Incorporation or   Directly or Indirectly 
                                       Organization     Owned by the Registrant
<S>                                 <C>                <C>
Registrant:

  Apertus Technologies Incorporated       Minnesota                
                                                         
Subsidiaries:                                            
                                                         
  BlueLine Software, Inc.                 Minnesota                 100%
                                                         
  Apertus Technologies Canada Inc.        Canada                    100%
                                                         
  BlueLine B.V.                           Holland                   100%
                                                         
  Systems Strategies, Inc.                New York                  100%
                                                         
  Systems Strategies Limited              United Kingdom            100%
                                                         
  Apertus Inc. GMBH                       Germany                   100%

</TABLE>
Case 1:06-cv-15083-AKH Document 2 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:06-cv-15003-AKH     Document 11      Filed 02/06/2008     Page 1 of 3

Case 1:06-cv-15003-AKH     Document 11      Filed 02/06/2008     Page 2 of 3

Case 1:06-cv-15003-AKH     Document 11      Filed 02/06/2008     Page 3 of 3
Exhibit
      32.1





**Certification
      of CEO and CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of Great Plains Energy
      Incorporated (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007 as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      "Report"), Michael J. Chesser, as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
      Officer of the Company, and Terry Bassham, as Executive Vice President - Finance
      and Strategic Development and 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
      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/
                Michael J. ChesserName:
              Title:
            Michael
                J. Chesser
              Chairman
                of the Board and Chief
              Executive
                OfficerDate:
            August
                3, 2007/s/
                Terry BasshamName:
              Title:
            Terry
                Bassham
              Executive
                Vice President – Finance and Strategic Development and Chief
                Financial OfficerDate:
            August
                3, 2007





This
      certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
      and
      is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
      document.  This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes
      of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to
      liability under that section.  This certification shall not be deemed
      to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of
      1933
      or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 except to the extent this Exhibit 32.1
      is
      expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such
      filing.





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 Great Plains Energy Incorporated and will
      be retained by Great Plains Energy Incorporated and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
Exhibit 99.1
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted),  Robert L. Walker,  Chief Executive  Officer of International  Leisure
Hosts,  Ltd.  (the  "Company"),  hereby  certifies  that,  to  the  best  of his
knowledge:

1.       The  Company's  Quarterly  Report on Form  10-QSB for the period  ended
         December 31, 2003, to which this  Certification  is attached as Exhibit
         99.1 (the "Quarterly Report"),  fully complies with the requirements of
         section  13(a) or  15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  as
         amended; and

2.       The information  contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents,  in
         all  material  respects,   the  financial   condition  and  results  of
         operations  of the  Company  at the end of the  period  covered  by the
         Quarterly  Report and  results of  operations  of the  Company  for the
         period covered by the Quarterly Report.


/s/ Robert L. Walker

Robert L. Walker
Chief Executive Officer
February 12, 2004




                                  Page 18 of 21
PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 32.1/2



                                  CERTIFICATION

     Pursuant  to  18U.S.C.  Section  1350,  the  undersigned  officers of Ocean
Bio-Chem, Inc. (the "Company"),  hereby certify that the Company's Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Report")  fully complies
with  the  requirements  of  Section  13(a)  or  15(d),  as  applicable,  of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial condition and results
of operation of the Company.

Dated:  March 29, 2007


/s/ Peter G. Dornau
---------------------
Peter G. Dornau
Chairman of the Board of
Directors  and Chief Executive Officer





/s/ Edward Anchel
---------------------
Edward Anchel
Chief Financial Officer



























                                       27
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

489 

KA 12-01772 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, FAHEY, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SHAWN A. MCNEW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

KATHLEEN E. CASEY, BARKER, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

MICHAEL J. VIOLANTE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LOCKPORT (THOMAS H. BRANDT OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Matthew J.

Murphy, III, J.), rendered July 9, 2012. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sexual act

in the first degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is 

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him

upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal sexual act in the first

degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.50 [2]). Contrary to defendant’s

contention, his waiver of the right to appeal was knowingly,

voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d

248, 256; People v Pratt, 77 AD3d 1337, 1337, lv denied 15 NY3d 955). 

The valid waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his

challenge to County Court’s suppression ruling (see People v Kemp, 94

NY2d 831, 833; People v Rodriguez, 111 AD3d 1310, 1310), and the

severity of the sentence (see Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256). Contrary to

defendant’s further contention, we conclude that his guilty plea was

knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered. Defendant’s

assertions that he did not have sufficient time to consider the plea

offer and that he was coerced into taking the plea because he believed

that the People would pursue charges against his son are belied by his

statements during the plea colloquy (see People v Allen, 99 AD3d 1252,

1252). In addition, we note that “ ‘a plea agreement is not

inherently coercive or invalid simply because it affords a benefit to

a loved one, as long as the plea itself is knowingly, voluntarily and

intelligently made’ ” (People v Capoccetta, 60 AD3d 1382, 1382, lv

denied 13 NY3d 858). Finally, we note that the certificate of

conviction incorrectly recites that defendant was convicted of

attempted criminal sexual act under Penal Law §§ 110.00 and 130.50

(1), and it must therefore be amended to reflect that he was convicted

under Penal Law §§ 110.00 and 130.50 (2) (see generally People v 
-2- 489 

KA 12-01772 

Saxton, 32 AD3d 1286, 1286-1287).

Entered: May 2, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                           Sep-30-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                             PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>               2,321,156
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>               342,096
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                    263,606
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                  196,643
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          3,123,501
<COMMON>                                  449,697
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                  (1,664)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                       444,984
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>            898,186
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                89,062
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                      936,480
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                            935
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                       0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>              73,752
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                       0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>          1,130,255
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>           3,123,501
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                 700,382
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                       61,128
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                500,868
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                561,996
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                   138,386
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                        (18,373)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>            120,013
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   52,869
<NET-INCOME>                               67,144
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                 2,866
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>              64,278
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                   75,202
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                  44,777
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                    177,868
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                1.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                1.04


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                           Sep-30-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                             PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>               2,308,405
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>               331,623
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                    248,444
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                  180,934
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          3,069,406
<COMMON>                                  449,697
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                  (1,674)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                       461,430
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>            910,150
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          62
<PREFERRED>                                89,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                      859,575
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                          6,741
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                       0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>              36,287
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                       0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>          1,168,288
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>           3,069,406
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                 748,599
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                       70,854
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                519,476
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                590,330
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                   158,269
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                          7,908
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>            166,177
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   54,370
<NET-INCOME>                              111,807
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                 2,930
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>             108,877
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                   75,807
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                  43,426
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                    261,447
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                1.76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                1.76


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

 

 

PHYLLIS ANDREWS, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. Civil Action No. 07-3368 (SCR) 

ARTHUR B. MODELL, 

 Defendant. 

DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO 

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND 

EXHIBIT 7 

 

 

Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 11-8 Filed 07/24/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:06-cv-15077-AKH Document 3 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### HEDDEN v. HALL

No. 149 PC.

Case below: 23 N.C. App. 453.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 30 December 1974.
#### IN RE KIRKMAN

No. 313 PC

No. 131 (Fall Term)

Case below: 47 NC App 479

Petition by Minnie H. Kirkman for discretionary review under 7A-31 allowed 16 September 1980.
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 66-17 Filed 10/04/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 66-17 Filed 10/04/2007 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 10K
 AMENDMENT TO THE
 2003 STOCK OPTION PLAN
 2005 INDEPENDENT SALES AGENT STOCK OPTION PLAN
 2006 STOCK OPTION PLAN
 AND
 2006 INDEPENDENT SALES AGENT STOCK OPTION PLAN
 OF
 AUTOINFO, INC.
 
 WHEREAS,each of the AutoInfo, Inc. (the "Company") 2003 Stock Option Plan (the "2003 Plan"), 2005 Independent Sales Agent Stock Option Plan (the "2005 Plan"), 2006 Stock Option Plan (the "2006 Plan") and 2006 Independent Sales Agent Stock Option Plan (the "Independent Sales Agent Plan") (collectively, the "Plans") provide that "the Board of Directors (the "Board"), may at any time and from time to time, suspend, terminate, modify or amend the Plan; and
 WHEREAS,on October 7, 2010 (the "Effective Date"), the Board of the Company by unanimous written consent adopted resolutions authorizing and approving an amendment to each of the Plans to permit the cashless exercise of Options granted and to be granted under the Plans.
 NOW THEREFORE, as of the Effective Date, the Plans are hereby amended as follows:
 
 1.
Section 6(d) of each of the 2003 Plan and 2005 Plan, respectively, is hereby amended to read as follows:
 
 "(d)      Medium and Time of Payment.  The Option Price multiplied by the number of shares of Common Stock exercised by the Optionee shall be paid in full, at the time of exercise, (i) in cash; or (ii) by the cancellation of the number of shares of Common Stock covered by the Option upon exercise having a Fair Market Value equal to the Option Price multiplied by the number of shares of Common Stock exercised by the Optionee."
 
 
 2.
Section 6(e) of each of the 2006 Plan and Independent Sales Agent Plan, respectively, is hereby amended to read as follows:
 
 "(e)      Medium and Time of Payment.  The Option Price multiplied by the number of shares of Common Stock exercised by the Optionee shall be paid in full, at the time of exer­cise, (i) in cash; or (ii) by the cancellation of the number of shares of Common Stock covered by the Option upon exercise having a Fair Market Value equal to the Option Price multiplied by the number of shares of Common Stock exercised by the Optionee."
SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED

SUPERSEDED
#### NATIONAL FOODS, INC., Plaintiff, v. Schulem RUBIN, individually and as Director of the Kosher Law Enforcement Division of the Department of Agriculture and Markets of the State of New York, Defendant.

No. 89 Civ. 2930 (MGC).

United States District Court, S.D. New York.

July 24, 1990.

See also, 752 F.Supp. 178.

Stein, Zauderer, Ellenhorn, Frischer & Sharp by David N. Ellenhorn, Harry Frischer, Daniel J. Rothstein, New York City, for plaintiff.

Rosenman & Colin by Gerald Walpin, Charles E. Knapp, New York City, for defendant.

CEDARBAUM, District Judge.

After oral argument, I denied defendant’s motion to assess sanctions against the plaintiff under Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and reserved decision on defendant’s application for attorneys’ fees pursuant to the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act of 1976. 42 U.S.C. § 1988. My examination of the opinions interpreting section 1988 does not support defendant’s argument that in enacting section 1988 Congress intended that plaintiffs should bear the burden of defendants’ attorneys’ fees in circumstances in which the complaint does not violate Rule 11. *See, e.g., Hughes v. Rowe,*449 U.S. 5, 101 S.Ct. 173, 66 L.Ed.2d 163 (1980); *Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC,*434 U.S. 412, 98 S.Ct. 694, 54 L.Ed.2d 648 (1978); *Oliveri v. Thompson,*803 F.2d 1265 (2d Cir.1986), *cert. denied sub nom. County of Suffolk v. Graseck,*480 U.S. 918, 107 S.Ct. 1373, 94 L.Ed.2d 689 (1987).

Essentially, defendant contends that a lesser degree of meritlessness is required under section 1988 to justify the assessment against the plaintiff of a prevailing *1243defendant’s attorneys’ fees. However, as the Supreme Court stated in *Christians-burg, “*‘meritless’ is to be understood as meaning groundless or without foundation, rather than simply that the plaintiff has ultimately lost his case ...” 434 U.S. at 421, 98 S.Ct. at 700. *See also Hughes v. Rowe,*449 U.S. at 14, 101 S.Ct. at 178.

Unlike Rule 11 which is mandatory, section 1988 provides that “the court, *in its discretion,*may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs.” 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (emphasis added). Neither the legislative history nor the case law requires a district judge to assess attorneys’ fees against the plaintiff in a case in which Rule 11 has not been violated. In any event, I find that plaintiff’s claims in this case were not “frivolous, unreasonable or without foundation, even though not brought in subjective bad faith.” *Hughes v. Rowe,*449 U.S. at 14, 101 S.Ct. at 178, *quoting Christiansburg,*434 U.S. at 421, 98 S.Ct. at 700. Accordingly, defendant’s application under section 1988 is denied.

SO ORDERED.
Case 1:06-cv-14948-AKH Document 2 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1