alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16679]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7880]



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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Biological Sciences; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Biological Sciences (#1754).
    Date and Time: April 14-15, 1995, 8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
    Location: Room 380, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Blvd., Arlington, VA.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. Charles Keith, C-RUI Program Coordinator, 
Division of Biological Instrumentation and Resources, Room 615, NSF, 
4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230, (703) 306-1472.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals received in response to 
the first Collaborative Research at Undergraduate Institutions 
competition being run by the BIO and MPS directorates.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information; financial data, such as salaries; and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: March 27, 1995.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-7880 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 23, 2022

No. 04-22-00531-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF I.M., A CHILD,

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021PA00828

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court signed the Order of Termination on March 22, 2022, making the notice of 

appeal due on April 11, 2022. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(b). A notice of appeal was filed on 

August 19, 2022. Therefore, it appears that this Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. It is 

therefore ORDERED that Appellant(s) show cause in writing, no later than October 3, 2022,

why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. If Appellant(s) fail to respond 

within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 42.3(c).

Furthermore, on August 29, 2022, the clerk’s record in this appeal was filed. The notice 

of appeal, which appears to be drafted by a pro se, is defective in several ways, most importantly 

in that it does not state the date of the judgment or order appealed from and does not identify the 

appellant(s). Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.1(d) sets forth the required contents of a 

notice of appeal. The notice of appeal in this case does not comply with Rule 25.1(d) because it 

does not:

. . .

(2) state the date of the judgment or order appealed from;

(3) state that the party desires to appeal;

(4) state the court to which the appeal is taken . . .;;

(5) state the name of each party filing the notice;

(6) in an accelerated appeal, state that the appeal is accelerated and state whether

it is a parental termination or child protection case, as defined in Rule 28.4;

(7) in a restricted appeal:

(A) state that the appellant is a party affected by the trial court’s judgment

but did not participate--either in person or through counsel--in the hearing

that resulted in the judgment complained of;

(B) state that the appellant did not timely file either a postjudgment motion,

request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, or notice of appeal; and
(C) be verified by the appellant if the appellant does not have counsel.

(8) state, if applicable, that the appellant is presumed indigent and may proceed

without paying costs under Rule 20.1.

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(d). Therefore, on September 1, 2022, this Court ordered Appellant(s) to 

file an amended notice of appeal on or before September 11, 2022. To date, no amended notice 

of appeal has been filed.

All other appellate deadlines are suspended until further order of this Court. 

It is so ORDERED September 23, 2022.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:__________________________

 MICHAEL A. CRUZ, 

 CLERK OF COURT
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16633]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7952]



[[Page 16633]]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Docket No. ER95-300-000]


Wickland Power Services; Notice of Issuance of Order

March 28, 1995.
    On December 20, 1994 and February 6, 1995, Wickland Power Services 
(WPS) submitted for filing a rate schedule under which WPS will engage 
in wholesale electric power and energy transactions as a marketer. WPS 
also requested waiver of various Commission regulations. In particular, 
WPS requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR 
Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability by WPS.
    On March 16, 1995, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, 
Division of Applications, Office of Electric Power Regulation, granted 
requests for blanket approval under Part 34, subject to the following:
    Within thirty days of the date of the order, any person desiring to 
be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of securities 
or assumptions of liability by WPS should file a motion to intervene or 
protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory 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 and 385.214).
    Absent a request for hearing within this period, WPS is authorized 
to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a 
guarantor, endorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of 
another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some 
lawful object within the corporate purposes of the applicant, and 
compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or 
appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of WPS's issuances of securities or assumption of 
liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protests, as set forth above, is April 17, 1995.
    Copies of the full text of the order are available from the 
Commission's Public Reference Branch, Room 3308, 941 North Capitol 
Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-7952 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7840

KEITH P. BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

BEN WILSON, Grievance Coordinator; JOHN M.

PRICE, Acting Warden, Baltimore City Detention; MARSHA BROADDUS, Director of Health

Services, Baltimore City Detention Center,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA95-588-CCB)

Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 10, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keith P. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Evelyn Omega Cannon, Assistant Attorney General,

Regina Hollins Lewis, Assistant Attorney General, OFFICE OF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Brown v. Wilson, No. CA-95-588-CCB (D. Md. Nov. 8, 1995). 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
December 15, 2016

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

RICHARD FORD AND JAMIE FORD, Appellants

NO. 14-15-00828-CV V.

CANDICE BLAND D/B/A THE DIAMOND MINE AND ROBERT 

BUCHANON, Appellees

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from an order in favor of appellees, Candice Bland 

D/B/A The Diamond Mine and Robert Buchanon, signed September 15, 2015, was 

heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find error 

in the trial court’s order. We therefore AFFIRM IN PART; REVERSE and 

RENDER IN PART; and REVERSE IN PART the order of the court below and 

REMAND the cause for proceedings in accordance with the court’s opinion.

We further order that each party shall pay its costs by reason of this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Organization Name:

Note: Representatives submitting on behalf of an organization must enter information below.

Requestor Representative:

Section 301 Investigation: China's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation - Form to Request Exclusion of Product

When submitting a product exclusion request using this form, enter the specified 

information in the following fields and explain the basis and rationale for your statements. 

By completing this form, you certify that the information provided is complete and 

correct to the best of your knowledge. 

1. Indicate whether the comment contains business confidential information (BCI), is a public

document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

3.

2. Please provide a complete and detailed description of the product of concern:

4.

5. Requestor's relationship to the product:

CONTINUED BELOW

*

10-digit HTSUS item number* for product you wish to address in this product exclusion request:

Use numerical characters only with no special characters (example: 1023456789). For help in finding 

the HTSUS item number associated with your product, see https://hts.usitc.gov/

1

7.

6. Does this submission in regulations.gov include additional attachments?

Please indicate whether any additional attachment contains business confidential

information (BCI), is a public document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

VERSION 1

Requestor Information

Requestor Name (Last, First):

Public Version of BCI

RC2510, 25.8 ton Capacity, 10.25 in Stroke, General Purpose Hydraulic Cylinder; Maximum Operating 

Pressure psi: 10000; Weight Kgs: 14,1; Oil Capacity Advance cm3: 867; Stroke Ranges mm: 240 - 

289

8412210075 Schmidt, Jackie Enerpac Jackie SchmidtImporter Yes Contains BCI
END 2

8. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in the United States?:

VERSION 1

11. Please provide information in support your request, taking account of the instructions

provided in Section B of the Federal Register notice (note: text entered below can extend

beyond the apparent size of this box).

9. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in third countries?:

10. Please provide the value and quantity (with units) of the Chinese-origin product of concern

that you purchased for each calendar year specified. Limit this figure to the products

purchased by your firm (or by members of your trade association) alone. Please provide 

estimates if precise figures are unavailable.

2016 Value:

2015 Value:

2017 Value:

2016 Quantity:

2015 Quantity:

2017 Quantity:

No No BCI BCI BCI BCI BCI BCI

See addendum for additional information.
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-2018-0025-4763

Horizon Hobby 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
-1- 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

COURT OF APPEALS 

STONECREST BUILDING COMPANY, 

and 

RICHARD J. SABLE, 

 Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

UNPUBLISHED 

July 21, 2015 

v No. 319841 

Macomb Circuit Court 

CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, LC No. 2008-001055-CH 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v No. 319842 

Macomb Circuit Court 

STONECREST BUILDING COMPANY, 

and 

RICHARD J. SABLE, 

LC No. 2008-002153-CH 

 Defendants-Appellees. 

ON RECONSIDERATION 

Before: RONAYNE KRAUSE, P.J., and K. F. KELLY and SHAPIRO, JJ. 

K. F. KELLY, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part) 

 I agree with the bulk of the majority opinion, but write separately to express my view 

that, while there is an ambiguity regarding whether Sable personally guaranteed sums that were 

already due when the documents was signed, there is no similar ambiguity regarding whether he 

guaranteed payment for the ongoing accumulations of contractual interest accruing on the pre-
-2- 

July 30, 2007 debt. Those interest payments, while based on principal payments due prior to 

July 30, 2007, continued to accrue after that date. Under the plain language of the Guaranty, all 

payments coming due after July 30, 2007 are within the Guaranty and there is no exception 

provided for interest. Accordingly, I would conclude that when determining the amount of 

damages payable by Sable for “sums payable by Stonecrest” after July 30, 2007, the trial court 

on remand should calculate and include the amount of interest incurred after that date for 

principal debts incurred prior to that date. Thus, I remain convinced our original opinion, issued 

April 7, 2015, now vacated, is correct. 

/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly
**Exhibit 10.4**

 

**AMENDMENTTO**

**EXECUTIVE  EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT**

 

CARDINAL FINANCIALCORPORATION (“Cardinal”) and Kendal E. Carson (“you” and all similarreferences) hereby agree that the Executive Employment Agreement by and betweenthem effective March 6, 2006 with an Addendum is amended effective as ofthe date below by making the changes below:

 

Sections 1.a and 1.b. arereplaced with the following:

 

a.                                       During your employment on and after April 1,2009 (the “Amendment Date”), Cardinal agrees to employ you as an ExecutiveOfficer in the position of Market President, Cardinal Bank, reporting to theChief Lending Officer, and you agree to accept such employment, devotingsubstantially all of your business time, effort and attention to the businessof Cardinal Bank, and performing such duties as are normally associated withyour position.

 

b.                                      Your initial base salary as of theAmendment Date will be $187,500 annually, less required and authorizedwithholding and deductions, payable in installments in accordance with CardinalBank’s normal payroll practices. You will be eligible for an annual meritincrease, performance bonus and stock option grants on the same basis as othersimilarly situated Executive Officers of Cardinal Bank and subject to the termsof any applicable compensation, bonus and stock plans, provided that you willreceive a minimum bonus of $7,500 for 2009.

 

Except as amended above,the terms of the Executive Employment Agreement with an Addendum remain ineffect.

 

The parties have signedthis Amendment this 31st day of March, 2009.

 
|                 |   | CARDINAL FINANCIAL  CORPORATION |
|----------------------|--------|---------------------------------|
|                 |   |                            |
|                 |   |                            |
| /s/ Kendal E. Carson |   | By                              | /s/ Bernard H.  Clineburg |
| Kendal E. Carson     |   |                            | Bernard H. Clineburg |
|                 |   |                            | Chairman and CEO |

 

----
Exhibit 13.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Lorus Therapeutics Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ended May 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William G. Rice, Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best
of my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
(the “Exchange Act”); and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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



Date: July 30, 2014



|/s/ William G. Rice                   | 
|------------------------------------- | 
|William G. Rice, Ph.D.                | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer | 



This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for
purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification
shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange
Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

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.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

August 13, 2012

Order 

August 13, 2012

143475(69)(71)

BRUCE WHITMAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant/

Cross-Appellee,

SC: 143475

v COA: 294703

Genesee CC: 08-087993-CL

CITY OF BURTON and CHARLES SMILEY,

Defendants-Appellees/

Cross-Appellants.

______________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, motions by the Michigan Association for Justice and 

the Michigan Municipal League, Michigan Townships Association and the Public 

Corporation Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan for leave to file briefs amicus 

curiae are considered and they are granted.
---

---

Exhibit 15.1

# CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-96929 and 333-127340)
of our reports dated July 12, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and
schedule of Magal Security Systems Ltd. and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting of Magal Security Systems Ltd. included in this Annual Report on Form
20-F for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

|                 |                                 
|---------------- | --------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|                 | /s/ Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer
|Tel-Aviv, Israel | KOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERER    
|July 12, 2009    | A Member of Ernst & Young Global



---

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM GATEWAY
2000, INC.'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,169,810
<SECURITIES>                                   158,657
<RECEIVABLES>                                  573,799
<ALLOWANCES>                                    14,948
<INVENTORY>                                    167,924
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,228,186
<PP&E>                                         765,578
<DEPRECIATION>                                 234,590
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,890,380
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,429,674
<BONDS>                                          3,360
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,566
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,342,809
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,890,380
<SALES>                                      7,467,925
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,467,925
<CGS>                                        5,921,651
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,921,651
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,991
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 930
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                541,248
<INCOME-TAX>                                   194,849
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            346,399
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   346,399
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.18
        

</TABLE>