alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 5487]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01845]


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

LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION


Assessing the Goals in the Strategic Plan 2012-2016; Request for 
Comments; Correction

AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation.

ACTION: Correction notice.

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

SUMMARY: On January 22, 2016, the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) 
published a notice in the Federal Register (81 FR 3836) titled 
``Assessing the Goals in the Strategic Plan 2012-2016; Request for 
Comments.'' The contact information listed in the Supplementary 
Information section of the previous notice has an incorrect link to 
LSC's Strategic Plan. This document corrects the notice by correcting 
the link to LSC's Strategic Plan with the correct web link.

DATES: This correction is effective January 22, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Fertig Cohen, Chief of Staff, 
Legal Services Corporation, 3333 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20007; 
(202) 295-1576; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6605090e030814260a150548010910"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f695999e939884b69a8595d8919980">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The correct link to LSC's Strategic Plan is 
available at http://www.lsc.gov/about-lsc/who-we-are/strategic-plan.

    Dated: January 28, 2016.
Katherine Ward,
Executive Assistant to the Vice President for Legal Affairs and General 
Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2016-01845 Filed 2-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7050-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of SAVVIS Communications
Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:



|(a) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003, filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: and
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(b) | information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |                            
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------
|                       |  | 
|Date: October 30, 2003 |  |  |  | By: /s/ Robert A. McCormick
|                       |  |  |  |
EXHIBIT 11-1

                        SAVVIS COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
   CALCULATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED LOSS PER SHARE AND WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES
                             USED IN EPS CALCULATION
                                   (UNAUDITED)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


For the Three-Months Ended                                                       June 30, 2002
                                                                                 -------------
<S>                                                                               <C>
Weighted average shares outstanding:
Common stock:
  Shares outstanding at beginning of period, net of 559,997
  shares subject to forfeiture                                                      93,426,510

  Weighted average shares, net of treasury shares, issued or vested during
  the three months ended June 30, 2002 (40,133 new shares issued)                      110,768
                                                                                  ------------
                                                                                    93,537,278
                                                                                  ============
Loss attributable to common shareholders                                          $(25,870,000)
                                                                                  ------------
Basic and diluted loss per share                                                  $      (0.28)
                                                                                  ============

</TABLE>


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


For the Six-Months Ended                                                         June 30, 2002
                                                                                 -------------
<S>                                                                               <C>

Weighted average shares outstanding:
Common stock:
  Shares outstanding at beginning of period, net of 740,928
  shares subject to forfeiture                                                      93,177,425

  Weighted average shares, net of treasury shares, issued or vested during
  the six months ended June 30, 2002 (108,287 new shares issued)                       284,904
                                                                                  ------------
                                                                                    93,462,329
                                                                                  ============
Loss attributable to common shareholders                                          $(47,337,000)
                                                                                  ------------
Basic and diluted loss per share                                                  $      (0.51)
                                                                                  ============

</TABLE>



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This case was decided by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7691
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WALTER LOUIS INGRAM, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA92-116-JFM) Submitted: June 12, 2003 Decided: June 17, 2003 Before LUTTIG and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. * Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Walter Louis Ingram, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Walter Louis Ingram appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. SeeUnited States v. Ingram , No. CA-92-116-JFM (D. Md. Sept. 18, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

United States Space Command

USSPACECOM

                - 
                - 
                - 
                - 
                - 

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  About    -  Mission         
  -  Warfighting Units         
  -  Frequently Asked Questions         
  -  Strategic Vision         
  -  Emblem 
-  Leaders    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Command Senior Enlisted Leader         
  -  Chief of Staff 
-  Support    -  Inspector General         
  -  FOIA      -  Making a FOIA Request         
    -  Reading Room 
  -  Equal Opportunity Coordinator         
  -  Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocate         
  -  Command Chaplain         
  -  Commandant         
  -  Resilience Program 
-  Newsroom    -  News      -  FY2025 Testimony 
  -  Photos and Videos         
  -  Speeches         
  -  Publications 
-  Contact		 
-  Partnerships and Outreach    -  Academic Engagement Enterprise      -  AEE Articles of Interest         
    -  AEE Members 
  -  Careers      -  Civilians         
    -  Internships 
  -  Industry Engagement Portal 
-  Newcomers    -  Newcomer Information         
  -  Checking In 

# U.S. Space Command Emblem

#### **UNITED STATES SPACE COMMAND**

**Click to download emblem****SEAL****BLAZON**

**SYMBOLISM**
**Shield:****Seal: ****“UNITED STATES” **** “SPACE COMMAND”**
**Download Emblem Information**

#### **QUICK LINKS**

#### Accessibility  |  Section 508    Web PolicySite Map  |  Defense.gov  |  Intel.govQuestions  |  Privacy and SecurityContact Us  |  Inspector General  |  FOIAOPM.gov  |  Plain Writing Act | MISONo Fear Act  |  Links DisclaimerUSA.gov  |  DoD Open Government

                  - Facebook
                  - X
                  - YouTube
                  - LinkedIn
                  - Civilian Careers

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135577 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 135577 

 COA: 280280 

Muskegon CC: 98-041693-FH

BOBBY HUNTER,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 12, 2007 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

s0616 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

June 23, 2008 

 Clerk
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0194]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a collection of information entitled “Biosimilar User Fee Cover Sheet; Form FDA 3792” has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,                         *PRAStaff@fda.hhs.gov*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On June 23, 2015, the Agency submitted a proposed collection of information entitled “Biosimilar User Fee Cover Sheet; Form FDA 3792” to OMB for review and clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0718. The approval expires on December 31, 2018. A copy of the supporting statement for this                           ( print page 5764)                        information collection is available on the Internet at                     *http://www.reginfo.gov/​public/​do/​PRAMain*.                

Dated: January 28, 2016.

Leslie Kux,

Associate Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 2016-01883 Filed 2-2-16; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Rory J. Cowan, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Lionbridge Technologies, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact 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 presentin all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, 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 SECtransition instructions contained in SEC Release No. 34-47986]; 

 

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 endof 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 fiscalquarter 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 officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, of internalcontrol 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 control overfinancial 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 significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date:May 7, 2004
#### HENRY A. SMITH v. JIM STEEN and CARRY STEEN.

(Filed 28 November, 1945.)

Appeal and Error § 37a—

The burden is on the appellant, not only to show error, but to enable the court to see that he was prejudiced or the verdict of the jury probably influenced thereby.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Olive, Special Judge,*at May Term, 1945, of RiciimoNd. No error.

Action for damages for wrongful eviction from leased premises. Plaintiff alleged that on account of threats of physical violence by defendant Jim Steen, and his wrongfully cutting the electric wires, plaintiff was forced to vacate a dwelling house which he had leased from the defendants; that due to the wrongful conduct of defendants he was badly frightened and suffered injury to his electrical appliances. Plaintiff alleged substantial damage, both compensatory and punitive.

Defendants, answering, denied making the threats complained of, and alleged that the cutting of the electric wires was caused by plaintiff’s improper use of electricity in violation of contract.

The following issue was submitted to the jury: “Did the defendant Jim Steen wrongfully evict the plaintiff from the house he had rented ?” The jury answered the issue “No.” Other issues were not answered.

From judgment for defendants on the verdict, plaintiff appealed.

*A. A. Reaves and George S. Steele, Jr., for plaintiff.*

*Z. V. Morgan for defendants.*

Devin, J.

The determinative issue of fact raised by the pleadings, and upon which the contest was waged, has been by the jury decided in *645favor of the defendants. The only assignments of error brought forward by the plaintiff in his appeal relate to the court’s instructions to the jury. An examination of the charge as a whole in the light of the criticism noted, however, leads us to the conclusion that no prejudicial error is shown, which should require upsetting the verdict and judgment and awarding a new trial. “The burden is on the appellant not only to show error but to enable the court to see that he was prejudiced or the verdict of the jury probably influenced thereby.” *Collins v. Lamb,*215 N. C., 719, 2 S. E. (2d), 863; *Wilson v. Lumber Co.,*186 N. C., 56, 118 S. E., 797.

The case at bar involved controverted questions of fact which seem to have been fairly presented. The triers of the facts have accepted the defendants’ version. The result will not be disturbed.

No error.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

EXHIBIT B 

COMPENSATION BY WORK TASK CODE FOR 

SERVICES RENDERED BY BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 

FOR THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 1, 2019 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30, 2019 

TASK

CODE DESCRIPTION HOURS AMOUNT 

001 Administrative Expense Claims 15.00 $3,000.00 

003 Automatic Stay 3.70 $3,389.50 

004 Bankruptcy Litigation 268.90 $107,768.00 

005 Bar Date Motion/Claims Noticing 97.70 $76,222.50 

006 Case Administration (docket updates, WIP and 

calendar) 102.90 $45,272.50 

008 Chapter 11 Plan/Plan Confirmation 614.50 $470,290.00 

009 Committee Meetings and Preparation 209.90 $172,134.50 

010 Corporate and Board Issues 0.80 $228.00 

012 DIP Financing/Cash Mgmt./Hedging Transactions 66.20 $51,678.50 

017 Executory Contracts/Lease Issues 26.80 $33,587.50 

018 

General Case Strategy (includes communications with 

Committee) 19.30 $9,746.00 

019 Hearings and Court Matters 34.80 $28,971.50 

020 Legislative Issues 507.90 $589,568.50 

021 Non-Bankruptcy Litigation 39.50 $23,962.00 

022 Non-Working Travel 176.30 $109,744.50 

024 District Court Litigation 186.00 103,344.00 

025 Regulatory Issues including CPUC and FERC 152.80 $100,116.00 

026 Retention Applications 2.70 $1,996.00 

027 Fee Application: Baker 130.40 $64,111.50 

028 Fee Application: Other Professionals 71.40 $38,770.50 

030 Tax Issues 7.40 $6,448.00 

031 U.S. Trustee/Fee Examiner Issues 9.60 $2,828.00 

032 Unsecured Creditor Issues/Communications/Meetings 37.80 $41,750.00 

036 Avoidance Action Analysis/Lien Avoidance Analysis 0.30 $228.00

038 Financial Advisors 1.50 $1,425.00 

039 Other Contested Matters 1.30 $988.00 

040 Operations 18.90 $8,418.50

042 Subrogation 131.20 $107,726.50 

043 Securities 2.00 $1,660.00 

045 Asset Analysis and Recovery 213.00 $112,046.00 

046 Tort Claims Estimation 3,368.20 $1,551,414.50 

048 Kincade Fire Issues 17.90 $15,692.50 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5247-2 Filed: 01/02/20 Entered: 01/02/20 13:05:43 Page 1

of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

TASK

CODE DESCRIPTION HOURS AMOUNT 

049 Mediation 147.20 $139,034.50 

050 Government Claims 271.10 $186,942.50 

051 CPUC BK OII 19-09-016 140.80 $131,517.50 

TOTAL 7,095.70 $4,342,021.00 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5247-2 Filed: 01/02/20 Entered: 01/02/20 13:05:43 Page 2

of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

017558.0085\5684430.1 ORDER 1 Wendel Rosen LLP 1111 Broadway, 24t h Floor Oakland, California 94607-4036 

Mark S. Bostick (Bar No. 111241) 

Lisa Lenherr (Bar No. 258091) 

WENDEL ROSEN LLP 

1111 Broadway, 24th Floor 

Oakland, California 94607-4036 

Telephone: (510) 834-6600 

Fax: (510) 834-1928 

Email: mbostick@wendel.com 

Email: llenherr@wendel.com 

Attorneys for Michael G. Kasolas, Claims 

Representative 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION 

-andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY, 

 Debtors. 

□ Affects PG&E Corporation 

□ Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

■ Affects both Debtors 

*All papers shall be filed in the Lead Case, 

No. 19-30088 (DM) 

 Case No. 19-30088-DM 

Chapter 11 (Lead Case) 

(Jointly Administered) 

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO 

ADVANCE FUNDS TO CLAIMS 

REPRESENTATIVE

 

 The above-captioned Debtors and the court appointed Claims Representative having entered 

into a Stipulation to Advance Funds to Claims Representative (the “Stipulation”), filed on December 

3, 2019, as Docket No. 4966, and pursuant to the Order Extending Bar Date for Fire Claimants and 

Appointment of Claims Representative, entered on November 11, 2019, as Docket No. 4672, and for 

good cause, 

Signed and Filed: December 4, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

December 04, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4980 Filed: 12/04/19 Entered: 12/04/19 15:24:03 Page 1 of

2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

017558.0085\5684430.1 ORDER 2 Wendel Rosen LLP 1111 Broadway, 24t h Floor Oakland, California 94607-4036 

 IT IS ORDERED that: 

1. The Stipulation is approved; 

2. The Debtors are authorized and directed to advance $395,000.00 to the Claims 

Representative and/or his Team member(s) (the “Advance”); and 

3. The Advance shall be paid via wire(s) to the Claims Representative and/or to a 

member(s) of his Team (instructions to be provided by the Claims Representative) so that it is 

received within three (3) business day following entry of this Order.

**END OF ORDER**

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4980 Filed: 12/04/19 Entered: 12/04/19 15:24:03 Page 2 of

2