alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 61 (Thursday, March 30, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16464-16465]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7853]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Energy Information Administration


American Statistical Association Committee on Energy Statistics

AGENCY: U. S. Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770), notice is hereby given of the 
following meeting:

    Name: American Statistical Association's Committee on Energy 
Statistics, a utilized Federal Advisory Committee. [[Page 16465]] 
    Dates and Times: Thursday, April 20, 9:00 am-4:15 pm; Friday, 
April 21, 9:00 am-12:00 pm.
    Place: Holiday Inn-Capitol, 550 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC.
    Contact: Ms. Renee Miller, EIA Committee Liaison, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, EI-72, 
Washington, DC 20585, Telephone: (202) 254-5507.

Supplementary Information:

    Purpose of the Committee: To advise the Department of Energy, 
Energy Information Administration (EIA), on EIA technical 
statistical issues and to enable the EIA to benefit from the 
Committee's expertise concerning other energy statistical matters.

Tentative Agenda

Thursday, April 20, 1995

A. Opening Remarks
B. Major Topics
    1. Effects of Structural Changes in Industry
    2. How the NEMS Transportation Module Operates
    3. Reconciliation of AEO and STEO Forecasts (Public Comment)

Friday, April 21, 1995

    4. Review of RECS Survey Design
    5. Estimates of State Level Natural Gas Consumption
    6. Results and Overall Plans for Customer Surveys (Public 
Comment)
C. Topics for Future Meetings

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. The 
Chairperson of the committee is empowered to conduct the meeting in 
a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. 
Written statements may be filed with the committee either before or 
after the meeting. If there are any questions, please contact Ms. 
Renee Miller, EIA Committee Liaison, at the address or telephone 
number listed above or Mrs. Antoinette Martin at (202) 254-5409.
    Transcripts: Available for public review and copying at the 
Public Reading Room, (Room 1E-290), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, 
Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-6025, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. 
and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Issued at Washington, DC on March 27, 1995.
Rachel Murphy Samuel,
Acting Deputy Advisory Committee, Management Officer
[FR Doc. 95-7853 Filed 3-29-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
* 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

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-10232 Summary Calendar

In the Matter of: AIRPORT PROPERTIES, Debtors.

City of Dallas, Appellant,

versus Airport Properties, Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas (4:96-CV-956-A)

July 24, 1997
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, JONES and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Ci ty of Dallas appeals the district court’s affirmance of an order of the

bankruptcy court granting Airport Properties’s motion to assume lease. Our review of

the record reflects neither clearly erroneous findings of fact nor errors of law. Based2

on the facts found and analysis made by the district court in its Memorandum Opinion

and Order signed and entered on February 7, 1997, we AFFIRM.
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 43837

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

BENJAMIN T. HINES JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 618

Filed: July 29, 2016

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Bonneville County. Hon. Joel E. Tingey, District Judge. 

Order denying Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Jenny C. 

Swinford, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Benjamin T. Hines Jr. entered an Alford1plea to possession of a controlled substance, 

methamphetamine, Idaho Code § 37-2732(c)(1). The district court imposed a unified seven-year 

sentence, with two years determinate, suspended the sentence, and placed Hines on a 365-day 

period of retained jurisdiction. Prior to completing his retained jurisdiction, Hines filed two 

separate Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motions. The district court denied both motions. Hines 

appealed from the denial of his first I.C.R. 35 motion and this Court affirmed the denial. 

 

1

See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970). 
2

Following his period of retained jurisdiction, the district court relinquished jurisdiction 

and executed the underlying seven-year sentence, with two years determinate. Hines filed 

another I.C.R. 35 motion, which the district court denied. Hines appeals.

Idaho Criminal Rule 35 states “no defendant may file more than one motion seeking a 

reduction of sentence under this Rule.” The prohibition of successive motions under I.C.R. 35 is 

jurisdictional and Idaho appellate courts have consistently held that I.C.R. 35 precludes a second 

motion for reduction of sentence. State v. Bottens, 137 Idaho 730, 732-33, 52 P.3d 875, 877-78 

(Ct. App. 2002); State v. Atwood, 122 Idaho 199, 200-01, 832 P.2d 1134, 1135-36 (Ct. App. 

1992). Thus, the district court lacked jurisdiction to grant Hines’ requested relief. Therefore, the 

district court’s order denying Hines’ I.C.R. 35 motion is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32
                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Salisbury Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
John F. Perotti, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, John F. Foley,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
            of the Company.

/s/  John F. Perotti                              /s/  John F. Foley
----------------------------------                ------------------
      John F. Perotti                                  John F. Foley
      Chief Executive Officer                          Chief Financial Officer

November 12, 2003

The foregoing certificate is furnished solely for purposes of complying with
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and for no other purpose
whatsoever. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth herein or in any
of the Company's previous filings under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that might incorporate the
Company's future filings, including this Report on Form 10-Q, in whole or in
part, this Certificate shall not be incorporated by reference into any such
filings.


                                       23
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                      10,526,816
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,353,928
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,674,404
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,762,110
<PP&E>                                       1,852,405
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,981,573
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              27,856,604
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       17,460,945
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,598
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,715,584
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                27,856,604
<SALES>                                     41,646,135
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            41,646,135
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               24,085,509
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            29,972,590
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (183,495)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (12,171,483)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (12,171,483)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.42)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1


                                                                  EXHIBIT 99(B)

                                                              February 18, 1998



The Board of Directors
Greenwood Trust Company and
Wilmington Trust Company:

We have examined management's assertion, included in its representation letter,
dated February 18, 1998, that Greenwood Trust Company ("GTC") maintained
effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 1997,
insofar as such system relates to the servicing procedures provided by GTC to
prevent or detect misstatements due to error or fraud in amounts that would be
material in relation to the assets of the Discover Card Trust 1993B (the
"Trust") under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement Sections 3.02, 4.03, 4.06,
4.07, 4.09, and 8.07, dated February 1, 1993 (the "Agreement").

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting,
testing, and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal
control, and such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances.  We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for
our opinion.

Because of inherent limitations in any internal control, misstatements due to
error or fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projections of any
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting to future periods are
subject to the risk that internal control may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or
procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, management's assertion that GTC maintained effective internal
control as of December 31, 1997, insofar as such system relates to the
servicing procedures provided by GTC, to prevent or detect misstatements due to
error or fraud in amounts that would be material in relation to the assets of
the Trust under the Agreement, taken as a whole, is fairly stated, in all
material respects, based upon criteria established in "Internal Control -
Integrated Framework" issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission.

This report is intended for the information and use of the Board of Directors
and management of GTC, Wilmington Trust Company as Trustee, and the Investor
Certificateholders, and should not be used for any other purpose.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
#### Joy A. Silverstein, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Dana A. Silverstein, Deceased, et al., Respondents, v Bronxville Obstetrical and Gynecological Group, P. C., et al., Appellants.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries based on medical malpractice, the defendants Bronxville Obstetrical & Gynecological Group, P. C., Sylvia Nielsen Gregory, as executrix of the estate of John Gregory, M.D., and Robert Armbruster, M.D., appeal, and the defendant Lawrence Hospital separately appeals, as limited by their briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Delaney, J.), entered April 6, 1988, as denied those branches of their respective motions which were for summary judgment dismissing the first, second and third causes of action.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, (1) by deleting the provision thereof which denied those branches of the defendants’ motions which were for summary judgment dismissing the second cause of action, and substituting therefor a provision granting those branches of the defendants’ motions, and (2) by deleting the provision thereof which denied those branches of the defendants’ motions which were for summary judgment dismissing so much of the third cause of action as seeks to recover damages on behalf of the plaintiff father for loss of the services of the infant Dana Ann Silver-stein, and substituting therefor a provision granting those branches of the defendants’ motions; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

A review of the record indicates that an issue of fact exists as to whether the plaintiff Mrs. Silverstein sustained independent physical injuries to her person, during childbirth, as a result of the defendants’ negligence. Accordingly, the Supreme *677Court properly denied those branches of the defendants’ motions for summary judgment which were to dismiss the first cause of action. If Mrs. Silverstein ultimately prevails on this first cause of action, she may recover damages, *inter alia,*only for emotional and psychic harm endured by her as a result of the alleged physical injury inflicted upon her because of the defendants’ negligence. However, she may not recover for any emotional and psychic harm attendant to the infliction of physical injury upon the infant Dana Ann Silverstein during childbirth, since no such physical injury was substantiated in the plaintiffs’ opposition papers *(see generally, Tebbutt v Virostek,*65 NY2d 931; *Vaccaro v Squibb Corp.,*52 NY2d 809; *Bubendey v Winthrop Univ. Hosp.,*151 AD2d 713; *Bauch v Verrilli,*146 AD2d 835; *Sceusa v Mastor, 135*AD2d 117; *Farago v Shulman,*104 AD2d 965, *affd*65 NY2d 763). For the same reason, the plaintiffs’ second cause of action, which seeks damages on behalf of the infant Dana Ann Silverstein, must be dismissed.

Finally, so much of the third cause of action as seeks damages on behalf of the plaintiff father for loss of the infant’s services, must also be dismissed, inasmuch as it is derivative in nature *(Maidman v Stagg,*82 AD2d 299). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Lamont WALKER, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 68388.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

June 11, 1996.

Raymond J. Capelovitch, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, David R. Truman, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and GRIMM, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals after he was convicted by a jury of one count of second degree burglary, § 569.170, RSMo 1986. The court sentenced him as a prior offender to a prison term of seven years. We affirm. We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 38 (Monday, February 27, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 10587]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4708]



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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Agency Forms Under Review

Background

    Notice is hereby given of the final approval of a proposed 
information collection by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
System (Board) under OMB delegated authority, as per 5 C.F.R. 1320.9 
(OMB Regulations on Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Federal Reserve Board Clearance Officer--Mary M. McLaughlin--Division 
of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
System, Washington, D.C. 20551 (202-452-3829)
OMB Desk Officer--Milo Sunderhauf--Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office 
Building, Room 3208, Washington, D.C. 20503 (202-395-7340).
    Proposal to approve under OMB delegated authority the 
implementation of the following report:
    1. Report title: 1995 Survey of Consumer Finances.
Agency form number: FR 3059.
OMB Docket number: 7100-0276.
Frequency: One time survey.
Reporters: U.S. Families.
Annual reporting hours: 6,133.
Estimated average hours per response: 1.3 hours.
Number of respondents: 4,600.
Small businesses are not affected.
    General description of report: This information collection is 
voluntary and authorized by law [12 U.S.C. 225a, 1828(c), 1842, 1843].
    Abstract: The survey, to be conducted between March and November 
1995, will collect data on the assets, debts, income, work history, 
pension rights, use of financial services, and attitudes of a sample of 
U.S. families. The survey is the only source of representative 
information on the structure of finances of U.S. families.
    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 21, 
1995.
William W. Wiles,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-4708 Filed 2-24-95; 8:45AM]
Billing Code 6210-01-F
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4902

Arrowhead Electrical Products, Inc:

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 failed to show that this particular product is available 

only from China.

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,

Stephen P. Vaughn
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 29, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16136]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7720]



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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL--5179-2]


Sparks Solvent Fuel Site; Notice of Proposed De minimis 
Administrative Settlement

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 122(i) of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) as 
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), 
notice is hereby given of a proposed de minimis administrative cost 
recovery settlement entered into by EPA, Region IX and Air BP, and 
operating division of BP Exploration & Oil Inc. (AIR BP). The proposed 
settlement was entered into under the authority granted EPA in section 
122(h) of CERCLA, and provides that Air BP will reimburse EPA its 
proportional share of the costs incurred at, in connection with, or 
anticipated to be incurred by EPA in providing oversight to a time 
critical removal being conducted at the Sparks Solvent Fuel site in 
Sparks, Nevada.
    For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this 
notice, EPA will receive written comments relating to the settlement. 
EPA may withdraw from or modify the proposed settlement should such 
comments disclose facts or considerations which indicate the proposed 
settlement is inappropriate, improper or inadequate. The Agency's 
response to any comments received will be available for inspection at 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (RC-1), 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Attention: Steve Armsey, 
Regional Hearing Clerk.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the proposed settlement may be obtained from Steve 
Armsey, U.S. EPA Region IX Hearing Clerk (RC-1), 75 Hawthorne St., San 
Francisco, CA. 94105. Comments should reference the Sparks Solvent Fuel 
site and EPA Docket No. 95-09.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Klaiman, Office of Regional 
Counsel, U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA, 
94105, Telephone: (414) 744-1374.

    Dated: March 9, 1995.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Director, Hazardous Waste Management Division.
[FR Doc. 95-7720 Filed 3-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M