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

###### Arctic Research Commission

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Arctic Research Commission will hold its 85th meeting in Boulder, CO on February 6-8,  2008. The Business Session, open to the public, will convene at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday, February 6, 2008 in Boulder, CO. An Executive Session will follow adjournment of the Business Session.

The Agenda items include:

(1) Call to order and approval of the Agenda.

(2) Approval of the Minutes of the 84th Meeting.

(3) Reports from Congressional Liaisons.

(4) Agency Reports.

The focus of the meeting will be reports and updates on programs and research projects affecting the Arctic.

Any person planning to attend this meeting who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs.

*Contact Person for More Information:*                     John Farrell, Executive Director, U.S. Arctic Research Commission, 703-525-0111 or TDD 703-306-0090.                

John Farrell,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 08-155  Filed 1-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
ABRWH 

Work Group on TBD-6000

March 15, 2012 

8:30 a.m. EDT 

Cincinnati Airport Marriott Hotel 

Conference Phone: 866-659-0537

Participant Code: 9933701 

AGENDA 

Note: Lunch break at 12:00 noon. Adjournment no later than 3:00 pm. 

1. Roll Call and Call to Order (Ted Katz and Paul Ziemer) 

2. Introductory remarks and review of Agenda (Paul Ziemer) 

3. Overview of NIOSH White Paper on doses from Betatron operations at GSI (Dave Alan) 

4. SC&A review of NIOSH White Paper on doses from Betatron operations at GSI (Robert 

Anigstein) 

5. Petitioner’s comments and review of NIOSH White Paper(s) and other issues related to 

the SEC Petition for GSI (Dan McKeel) 

6. Discussion on all SEC issues 

7. Work Group recommendations on SEC Petition for GSI 

8. Adjourn
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>          5
                   1,000


<S>                                <C>
Period type                        3 mos
Fiscal year end                    12/31/99
Period start                       1/1/99
Period end                         3/31/99
Cash                               15,643
Securities                         7,250
Receivables                        86,513
Allowances                         (3,774)
Inventory                          8,432
Current assets                     128,402
PP&E                               102,605
Depreciation                       (51,748)
Total assets                       275,438
Current liabilities                74,098
Bonds                              0
Preferred mandatory                0
Preferred                          0
Common                             649
Other SE                           118,318
Total Liability and Equity         275,438
Sales                              123,868
Total Revenue                      123,868
CGS                                85,286
Total costs                        85,286 
Other expenses                     28,961
Loss provision                     216
Interest expense                   540
Income pre tax                     8,739
Income tax                         3,710
Income continuing                  5,029
Discontinued                       0    
Extraordinary                      0
Changes                            0
Net income                         5,029
EPS basic                          .44
EPS diluted                        .41



</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-20372

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RICARDO FONTES,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-99-CR-692-1

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

December 14, 2000

Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The federal public defender appointed to represent Ricardo

Fontes on appeal of his drug-trafficking convictions has moved

for leave to withdraw by filing a motion and brief as required by

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). In response to the

Anders motion, Fontes moved for appointment of substitute counsel

due to the following “constitutional harm[s]”: (1) he did not

understand the language of the interpreter and all the questions

at the court proceedings; (2) because he misunderstood the

question “How do you feel?,” he expressed that he was not in
No. 00-20372 

-2-

pain, although he suffers from tuberculosis and arthritis; and

(3) he received ineffective legal assistance because his counsel

failed to challenge, or advise him that he could challenge, the

drug-quantity determination. The record has not been adequately

developed for us to consider Fontes’ ineffective-assistance-ofcounsel argument on direct appeal. See United States v. Haese,

162 F.3d 359, 363-64 (5th Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1138

(1999). 

Fontes has failed to establish incompatibility with his

counsel or other most pressing circumstances sufficient to

warrant a substitution of counsel. See Fifth Circuit Plan under

the CJA, § 3; United States v. Trevino, 992 F.2d 64, 65 (5th Cir.

1993). Furthermore, our independent review of the motion, brief,

and record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, the

appeal is DISMISSED, Fontes’ motion for appointment of substitute

counsel is DENIED, and Fontes’ motion for extension of time is

DENIED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
<PAGE>
 

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                       Consent of KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

The Board of Directors and Shareholders
Factory Card Outlet Corp.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form
S-8 (File nos. 333-21645, 333-22435, 333-30437 and 333-45461) of Factory Card
Outlet Corp. of our reports dated March 6, 1998, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of Factory Card Outlet Corp. and subsidiary as of January 31,
1998 and June 28, 1997, and the related consolidated statements of income,
stockholders' equity and cash flows for the transition period ended January 31,
1998 and each of the fiscal years in the three-year period ended June 28, 1997
and the related financial statement schedule, which reports appear in the
transition report on Form 10-K of Factory Card Outlet Corp.


                                       /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Chicago, Illinois
April 23, 1998
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 

THIS AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) is made on July 29th, 2014 

BETWEEN 
  

	(1)	KNOT SHUTTLE TANKERS 18 AS, a company incorporated in Norway whose registered office is at Smedasundet 40, 5529 Haugesund (the “Owner”); and 


 

	(2)	KNOT SHUTTLE TANKERS POOL AS, a company incorporated in Norway whose registered office is at Smedasundet 40, 5529 Haugesund (the “Charterers”) 


BACKGROUND 
  

	(A)	By a time charter party dated 6 April 2010 (as amended and previously novated, the “Time Charter”), the Previous Time Charterer agreed to hire and the Owner agreed to let the vessel
“Windsor Knutsen” (the “Vessel”) to the Previous Time Charterer on the terms and conditions set out in the Time Charter. 

  

	(B)	The Vessel was re-delivered by the Previous Time Charterers to the Owner On July 29th 2014 at 02.30 GMT. The vessel will enter into a new Time Charter
with the Previous Time Charterers during the 4 Q of 2015. 

  

	(C)	The Charterer has agreed to assume all the rights, liabilities and obligations stated in the Time Charter dated 6 April 2010 at the same terms and conditions from July 29th 2014 at 02.30 GMT until such date and time when the vessel will be re-delivered to the Previous Time Charterer. 


 

	(D)	It is further agreed that that Cl. 4 of the Time Charter is amended to allow for the T/C period to be adjusted accordingly. 

  

	1	INTERPRETATION 

 “Previous Time Charterers” means BRAZIL SHIPPING I
LIMITED, (formerly known as BG Oil Services Limited), a company organised and existing under the laws of England and Wales having its principal office at 100, Thomas Valley Park Drive Reading, Berkshire, RG6 1PT. 








	2	GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION 

  

	2.1	Incorporation of Time Charter provisions 

  

	    	Governing law, jurisdiction and dispute resolutions under this Agreement shall be as per the Time Charter. 


This Agreement has been executed by or on behalf of the parties to this Agreement as a deed on the date specified at the beginning of this Agreement. 

OWNER 
  

							
	 EXECUTED AND DELIVERED AS A DEED by
	  	 	)	  	  	/s/ Trygve Seglem
			
		  				  	Trygve Seglem
			
	For and on behalf of	  	 	)	  	  	
			
	KNOT SHUTTLE TANKERS 18 AS	  	 	)	  	  	
			
	 In the presence of:
	  	 	)	  	  	/s/ John Einar Dalsvaag
			
		  				  	John Einar Dalsvaag
			
	CHARTERER	  				  	
			
	 EXECUTED AND DELIVERED AS A DEED by
	  	 	)	  	  	/s/ Trygve Seglem
			
	For and on behalf of	  				  	
			
	KNOT SHUTTLE TANKERS POOL AS	  				  	
			
	 In the presence of:
	  	 	)	  	  	/s/ John Einar Dalsvaag
| 1. | Such      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September      30, 2009, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for      the period ending September 30, 2009, fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      Apextalk Holdings, Inc. |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      November 20, 2009                               |
|------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                       |
| /s/ Spencer Luo                                            |
| Spencer      LuoChief      Financial and AccountingOfficer |
# C_2011050EN.01000201.xml

| 17.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 50/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 50/2

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

2011/C 50/02

Image

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Spain

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Spain

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the Community providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

1

2

Issuing country: Spain

Subject of commemoration: UNESCO World Natural and Cultural Heritage Sites — Patio de los Leones of the Alhambra, Generalife and Albayzín in Granada

Description of the design: The design shows an image of the Patio de los Leones in the Alhambra in Granada. At the bottom the name of the issuing country ‘ESPAÑA’ and the year-date ‘2011’ and at the top, the mintmark.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Volume of issuance: 8 million coins

Date of issue: March 2011

---

(1)  For the other national sides of euro circulation coins, see http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/euro/cash/coins/index_en.htm

1

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

2

---
#### State of West Virginia *v.*Robert Darrell Saunders

(No. 14246)

Decided March 10, 1981.

*William L. Redd*and *Kirk L. Frankel*for plaintiff in error.

*Chauncey H. Browning,*Attorney General, *S. Clark Woodroe,*Assistant Attorney General, for defendant in error.

Harshbarger, Chief Justice:

In 1977, a Cabell County jury found Robert Darrell Saunders guilty of first-degree murder without a mercy recommendation. Saunders assigns three errors for reversal: Insubstantial evidence, inflammatory photo*501graphs, and prosecutorial misconduct in the closing argument.

Saunders’ friend, Sophia Brown, was found dead when firemen responded to a fire call for her apartment. Testimony by two medical examiners revealed that she had died of strangulation by a rope or cord, and was then set on fire. No evidence was introduced to counter these findings. At trial color photographs of Brown’s charred body were admitted in evidence and given to the jury.

One color photograph portrays the contorted body, unclothed except for several shreds of unburned garments, lying face up on the apartment floor. Half of the face and the exposed flesh of the arm, neck, shoulder, chest and torso are black or red from various degrees of burning. Another photograph is a color close-up of the disfigured face. The left portion of the head is burned beyond recognition, with what appears to be melted plastic debris searing the left eye closed. The right eye is intact and open, in a frozen stare at the viewer. The photographs are gruesome and inflammatory.

Our most detailed discussion of gruesome photographs is *State v. Rowe,*163 W.Va. 593, 259 S.E.2d 26 (1979). We summarized our rule in Syllabus Point 1:

> Gruesome photographs are not *per se*inadmissible, but they must have something more than probative value, because by the preliminary finding that they are gruesome, they are presumed to have a prejudicial and inflammatory effect on a jury against a defendant. The State must show that they are of essential evidentiary value to its case.

We wrote in *State v.*Clawson, _ W.Va _, 270 S.E.2d 659, 672 (1980), that the fact that a trial preceded *Rowe*does not make gruesome photographs less gruesome nor more admissible.

Nothing in this case or the brief indicates that the photographs were essential to the prosecution. There was uncontroverted medical testimony about cause of death and the body’s mutilation, and the only issue was identity *502
      *of*the killer. The photographs provided no clue for identifying the assailant, and served no purpose other than to inflame the jury. We stand strongly behind our views expressed in *Rowe,*appreciating defense counsel’s representation that after the jurors saw these photographs he could no longer get even eye contact with them.

We have reviewed the other errors assigned and find none to be a basis for reversal.

*Reversed.*
Exhibit
      31.2





CERTIFICATION





I, Lior
Ostashinsky, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
30, 2009, of Ametrine Capital, Inc.;





2. Based on my
knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light
of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report;





3. Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
period presented in this report;





4. The
registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and
have:





a) Designed such
disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;





b) [paragraph
omitted in accordance with Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(a)];





c) Evaluated the
effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and





d) Disclosed in
this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and





5. The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):





a) all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the 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 who have a
significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting.





Date: November
13, 2009


By: /s/Lior
      OstashinskyLior
      OstashinskyTreasurer(Principal
      Financial Officer)
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed August 5, 2014.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-14-00546-CV

TEXAS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP. 

F/K/A WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT CORP., Appellant

V.

FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI, LLP, Appellee

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-12-06695-E

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang-Miers, and Justice Brown 

Opinion by Chief Justice Wright

The clerk’s record in this case is overdue. In a letter dated June 26, 2014, we notified 

appellant that the Dallas County Clerk informed the Court that the clerk’s record had not been 

filed because appellant had not paid or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. We 

directed appellant to file, within ten days of the date of our letter, written verification that it had 

paid or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. We cautioned appellant that if we did 

not received the required documentation within ten days, we might dismiss the appeal without 

further notice. To date, appellant has not provided the required documentation regarding the 

status of the clerk’s record nor has it otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding this

appeal.
–2–

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 

42.3(b), (c).

140546F.P05

/Carolyn Wright/

CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

TEXAS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 

CORPORATION f/k/a WOODLAND 

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 

Appellant

No. 05-14-00546-CV V.

FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI, LLP, ET AL., 

Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 5, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-12-06695-E.

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, 

Justices Lang-Miers and Brown 

participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI, LLP, ET AL. recover its 

costs of this appeal, if any, from appellant TEXAS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 

CORPORATION f/k/a WOODLAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.

Judgment entered this 5th day of August, 2014.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 40178 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. SALVADOR BERNARDO GUZMAN

- PEREZ, true name Elvin Roy Perez

Lopez, also known as Luis Armando Guzman

- Perez , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:15

- CR

- 737

- 1

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Salvador Bernardo Guzman

- Perez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Guzman

- Perez has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED October 14, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-40178 Document: 00513718302 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/14/2016No. 16

- 40178

2 reflected therein , as well as Guzman

- Perez ’ s response . We concur with

cou nsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 4 2.2. Case: 16-40178 Document: 00513718302 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/14/2016