alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 2579]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-502]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-106-000]


ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

January 4, 1995.
    Take notice that on December 30, 1994 ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised 
Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets as listed in Attachment A.
    ANR states that the referenced tariff sheets are being submitted as 
part of ANR's Sixth Annual Reconciliation of buyout buydown costs being 
recovered by means of Volumetric Buyout Buydown Surcharges and Fixed 
Monthly Charges contained in Docket Nos. RP91-33, et al., RP91-192, 
RP92-4, RP92-199, RP93-29 and RP93-149. ANR has requested that the 
Commission accept the tendered tariff sheets to become effective 
February 1, 1995.
    ANR states that a copy of this filing, or such applicable parts, 
has been mailed to all of its Volumes No. 1 and No. 2 customers and 
interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Commission, 825 North 
Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426 in accordance with Rules 
211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.211, 385.214). All such motions or protests should be filed on or 
before January 11, 1995. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this 
application are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.

ANR Pipeline Company

Attachment A

Second Revised Volume No. 1
    Sixth Revised Sheet No. 17
    Third Revised Sheet No. 200
    Third Revised Sheet No. 204
    Third Revised Sheet No. 205
    Second Revised Sheet No. 206
    Second Revised Sheet No. 207
    Second Revised Sheet No. 208
    Second Revised Sheet No. 209
Original Volume No. 2
Original Sheet Nos. 13, 14 and 15

[FR Doc. 95-502 Filed 1-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 32.1



Section 1350 Certification



Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) (17 CFR 240,13a-14(b)) or Rule 15d-14(b) (17 CFR 240,15d-14(b)) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. 1350), each of the undersigned officers of Adams Golf, Inc., (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge,
The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 (the "Periodic Report"), of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as applicable, and the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Periodic Report.



|                         |  |                                      
|------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------
|                         |  |                                      
|Date:  November 12, 2008 |  | By:/S/ OLIVER G. BREWER III          
|                         |  | Oliver G. Brewer, III                
|                         |  | Chief Executive Officer and President
|                         |  | (Principal Executive Officer)        
|                         |  |                                      
|Date:  November 12, 2008 |  | By:/S/ ERIC LOGAN                    
|                         |  | Eric Logan                           
|                         |  | Chief Financial Officer              
|                         |  | (Principal Financial Officer)        





The foregoing certification is furnished as an exhibit to the Periodic Report and will not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or Exchange Act, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       1,522,765
<SECURITIES>                                   111,962
<RECEIVABLES>                                   81,160
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,759,732
<PP&E>                                         364,718
<DEPRECIATION>                                 231,502
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,141,611
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          464,838
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       146,169
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,126,950
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,141,611
<SALES>                                        298,119
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               298,119
<CGS>                                          705,889
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  705,889
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (388,374)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (388,374)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (769,550)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)


</TABLE>
#### In re WILL OF W. T. YELVERTON.

(Filed 11 March, 1931.)

Appeal by propounders from *Devin, J.,*at October Term, 1930, of WayNE.

*Devismit vel non,*tried upon the following issues:

“1. Were the paper-writings propounded as the last will and testament of W. T. Yelverton, and the codicil thereto, executed in the manner and form as prescribed by the -statute for the execution of a valid last will and testament? Answer: Yes.

“2. At the time of the execution of the paper-writing propounded as his last will and testament dated 15 March, 1928, did said W. T. Yelver-ton have sufficient mental capacity to execute a valid will and testament? Answer: No.

“3. At the time of the execution of the paper-writing propounded as a codicil to his said last will and testament, dated 4 August, 1928, did the said W. T. Yelverton have sufficient mental capacity to execute a valid last will and testament? Answer : No.”

From a judgment on the verdict the propounders appeal, assigning errors.

*Diclcinson & Freeman, Langston, Allen & Taylor and Finch & Band for propounders.*

*Kenneth C. Boyall, J. Faison Thomson and Teague & Dees for caveators.*

Pee Cueiam.

This is the second appeal in a caveat proceeding, which has been tried twice in the Superior Court, with both trials lasting a number of days, and each resulting in a verdict for the caveators. *In re will of Yelverton,*198 N. C., 746, 153 S. E., 319.

*803The second hearing, from which the present appeal is prosecuted, seems to have been conducted in substantial conformity to the decisions on the subject, and we apprehend that no serious harm has come to the propounders in any of the particulars pointed out by their exceptions and assignments of error. It would apparently serve no useful purpose to prolong the litigation either here or in the court below. The case presents no question of law not heretofore settled by authoritative decisions.

The verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.
**Exhibit 32.1**
**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION**
In connection with the Quarterly Report of CNB Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, H. N.Padget, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, William R. Blanton,Chief Operating and Financial officer of the Company, certify, to the best ofmy knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.     /s/ H. N. Padget, Jr.  H. N. Padget, Jr., President and CEO (principal executive officer)    /s/ William R. Blanton  William R. Blanton, Vice Chairman, COO/CFO (principal financial officer)
November 12, 2004
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7114

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

NORMAN LANCE GARNER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (CR-97-485, CA-98-1579-7-20)

Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 21, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Alfred M. Boggs, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellant.

Harold Watson Gowdy, III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,

Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Norman Lance Garner seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. United States v. Garner, Nos. CR-97-485; CA98-1579-7-20 (D.S.C. June 29, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1



Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United Sates Code)





Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, Unites States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Adams Golf, Inc, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify that:
The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the "Periodic Report") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)) and information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|                         |  | ADAMS GOLF, INC.                     
|------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------
|                         |  |                                      
|Date:  November 12, 2003 |  | By:/S/ OLIVER G. BREWER III          
|                         |  | Oliver G. Brewer, III                
|                         |  | Chief Executive Officer and President
|                         |  |                                      
|Date:  November 12, 2003 |  | By:/S/ ERIC LOGAN                    
|                         |  | Eric Logan                           
|                         |  | Chief Financial Officer              
|                         |  | (Principal Financial Officer)        





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Act and is not being filed as part of the Periodic Report or as a separate disclosure document
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Adams Golf, Inc. and will be retained by Adams Golf, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request
#### STATE v. WILLIE WILLIAMS.

(Filed 18 September, 1957.)

*1.*Intoxicating Liquor § 9d—

Evidence that officers found whiskey in defendant's home in a container not having the requisite tax stamps on it, is sufficient to be submitted to the jury on the charge of unlawful possession of nontax-paid whiskey for the purpose of sale.

2. Searches and Seizures § 4—

Evidence tending to show that the officer read the search warrant to the defendant as soon as he could do so in the light of defendant’s conduct, and thereafter proceeded to examine the premises, fails to disclose illegal search.

CeetioRARI allowed upon petition of defendant to review the proceeding in the Superior Court, presided over by *Frizzelle, J.,*January Term 1957, of CraveN.

This defendant was originally tried in the Recorder’s Court of the City of New Bern on 12 July 1956 upon a warrant dated 11 June 1956 charging him with the unlawful possession of one-half gallon of nontax-paid whiskey for the purpose of sale. Verdict: guilty. Judgment was imposed and the defendant appealed therefrom to the Superior Court of Craven County.

In the Superior Court the defendant was tried upon the original warrant at the January Term 1957. The evidence discloses that two officers of the City of New Bern, clothed with a search warrant, went to the home of the defendant on 11 June 1956 for the purpose of searching for illegal whiskey. The defendant was at the back door of his kitchen and when informed by one of the officers that he had a search warrant, the defendant ran into an adjoining room and grabbed a fruit jar from a table and threw it down on a cot and most of its contents ran out on the cot. The officer testified that he saw the jar before the defendant grabbed it and that it was approximately full. The officer then read the search warrant to the defendant and thereafter proceeded to examine *615the fruit jar which was not broken and still contained a small quantity of nontax-paid whiskey. The jar had no State or Federal stamps on it. The defendant denied that the whiskey belonged to him. The jury returned a verdict of guilty. From the judgment entered on the verdict the defendant appeals to the Supreme Court, assigning error.

*Attorney-General Patton and Assistant Attorney-General Moody for the State.*

*Charles L. Abemethy, Jr., for defendant appellee.*

Per Curiam.

The defendant’s exception to the refusal of the court below to sustain his motion for judgment as of nonsuit is without merit.

The fact that nontax-paid whiskey was found in the home of the defendant was sufficient to take the case to the jury. *S. v. Harrison,*239 N.C. 659, 80 S.E. 2d 481.

It appears that the search warrant was read to the defendant as soon as the officer could do so in light of the defendant’s conduct. The defendant’s contentions otherwise are not supported by the record.

In the trial below we find

No error.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 26, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-3166

Protect Plus, LLC:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request did not contain a sufficient product identification or was 

determined to be non-administrable.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Eric F. Lundberg, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of American Lawyer
Media, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
quarterly report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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)) for the registrant
and have:  a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within the
registrant, particularly during the period in which this quarterly
report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as
of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report based on
such evaluation; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter 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 control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the 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 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: May 12, 2004 /s/ ERIC F. LUNDBERG
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 46 (Thursday, March 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 13004]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5768]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of Commercial Space Transportation

Environmental Impact Statement; Sierra and Dona Ana Counties, NM; 
Correction

AGENCY: Office of Commercial Space Transportation (OCTS), U.S. DOT.

ACTION: Correction.

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

SUMMARY: On February 23, 1995 the Office of Commercial Space 
Transportation (OCST), DOT; published a Notice of Intent at 60 FR 
(10139). The Notice gave the wrong date and location for the second 
scoping meeting. The date was given as March 23, 1995 and should have 
been March 21, 1995. The location was given as the Convention Center, 
300 Daniel Street. The correct location should have been listed as 
Council Room, City Council Chambers, 400 West 4th. This notice makes 
correction to the Notice of Intent. In FR DOC 95-4392, 3rd Column, para 
1, make the following correction:

* * * ``(2) March 21, 1995, 7:00-9:00 pm, Council Room, City Council 
Chambers, 400 West 4th, Truth or Consequences, New Mexico.''

    Dated: March 3, 1995.
Sharon D.W. Boddie,
Office of Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 95-5768 Filed 3-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-M
```
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-1765

GreenTech Environmental, LLC: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions

_05.09.19.pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel