alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 76 (Thursday, April 20, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19789-19790]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9822]



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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice 95-027]


Intent to Grant a Partially Exclusive Patent License

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Grant a Patent License.

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

SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice of intent to grant the Science and 
Technology Corporation, Hampton, [[Page 19790]] Virginia 23666-1340, a 
partially exclusive license to practice the inventions protected by the 
following U.S. Patents: 4,829,035 entitled ``REACTIVATION OF A TIN 
OXIDE-CONTAINING CATALYST,'' which was granted May 9, 1989; 4,855,274 
entitled ``PROCESS FOR MAKING A NOBLE METAL ON TIN OXIDE CATALYST,'' 
which was granted August 8, 1989; 4,912,082 entitled ``CATALYST FOR 
CARBON MONOXIDE OXIDATION,'' which was granted March 27, 1990; and 
4,991,181 entitled ``CATALYST FOR CARBON MONOXIDE OXIDATION,'' which 
was granted February 5, 1991, by the United States of America as 
represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
    The partially exclusive license will contain appropriate terms and 
conditions to be negotiated in accordance with NASA Patent Licensing 
Regulations (14 CFR Part 1245). NASA will negotiate the final terms and 
conditions and grant the license unless, within 60 days of the date of 
this notice, the Director of Patent Licensing receives written 
objections to the grant, together with supporting documentation. The 
Director of Patent Licensing will review all written responses to this 
notice and then recommend to the Associate General Counsel 
(Intellectual Property) whether to grant the license.

DATES: Comments to this notice must be received by (insert 60 days from 
the date of publication in the Federal Register).

ADDRESSES: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Code GP, 
Washington, DC 20546.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Harry Lupuloff, NASA, Director of Patent Licensing at (202) 358-
2041.

    Dated: April 7, 1995.
Edward A. Frankle,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 95-9822 Filed 4-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-M
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

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health Special Emphasis Panel; Early Phase Clinical Trials of Natural Products (NP).                    

*Date:*                         July 15, 2021.                    

*Time:*                         12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Center for Complementary and Integrative, Democracy II, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Shiyong Huang, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, Division of Extramural Activities, NCCIH/NIH, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 401, Bethesda, MD 20817,                         *shiyong.huang@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.213, Research and Training in Complementary and Alternative Medicine, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: May 27, 2021.

Tyeshia M. Roberson,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2021-11643 Filed 6-2-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### Gloria M. RODRIQUEZ, Respondent, v. Jose I. VASQUEZ, Appellant.

No. WD 45992.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

April 20, 1993.

Daniel D. Lane, Kansas City, for appellant.

*432Gloria M. Rodriquez, for respondent.

Before ULRICH, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and HANNA, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Appeal from the denial of a motion to set aside the dismissal of an application for a trial de novo.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
#### Chloe J. CHANDLER, Appellant, v. HYUNDAI MOTOR COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 01-91-00498-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (1st Dist.).

Aug. 8, 1991.

Robert L. Collins, Houston, for appellant.

Spencer G. Maride, Stephen R. Kirklin, Tim S. Leonard, Jack J. Garland, Jr., Houston, for appellee.

Before TREVATHAN, C.J., and DUGGAN and DUNN, JJ.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the trial court’s order approving the recommendations of a special master concerning discovery disputes. By order dated April 12,1991, the trial court denied appellant’s request for a hearing to overrule the protective order signed by the special master; overruled appellant’s objections to the scope of the protective order; and granted in all respects appellee’s motion for protective order.

In response to appellant’s motion for extension of time to file her brief, appellee asks this Court to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction because 1) it is an improper appeal from an interlocutory order; 2) appellant has failed to timely file a brief; 3) appellant failed to provide notice to appel-lee of the appeal; and 4) appellant faded to provide a complete transcript to this Court. Because appellee’s motion raises a question concerning our jurisdiction, we address that issue first.

*357Excluding four statutory exceptions 1 not applicable here, an appeal can be prosecuted only from a final judgment or order. *North East Independent School Dist. v. Aldridge,*400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex.1966); *Denny’s Inc. v. Rainbo Baking Co.,*764 S.W.2d 933 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1989, no writ); *Prodeco Exploration, Inc. v. Ware,*684 S.W.2d 199, 201 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, no writ). Until the trial court severs out a party or an issue, a judgment that does not dispose of all issues and parties is purely interlocutory and not yet appealable. *Cherokee Water Co. v. Ross,*698 S.W.2d 363, 365 (Tex.1985).

In her motion for extension of time to file her brief, appellant asserts she is bringing the appeal pursuant to Tex.R.Civ.P. 76a. Rule 76a pertains to the sealing of *court records;*it does not address protection from disclosure or dissemination of documents during discovery. In pursuing her appeal at this stage of the litigation, appellant attempts to equate an interlocutory order sealing court records, which is appealable, Tex.R.Civ.P. 76a(8), with an interlocutory order pertaining to discovery, which is not appealable. Appellant’s proper remedy in this case is to file an application for writ of mandamus complaining that the trial court abused its discretion in approving the protective order.

The order appealed from is interlocutory and we are without jurisdiction to consider it. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Our order of July 18, 1991, granting appellant’s motion for extension of time to file her brief, is withdrawn as improvidently granted.

1

. *See*in Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 51.014 (Vernon Supp.1991).
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Michael PEERY, Appellant. Michael PEERY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 63866.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Feb. 14, 1995.

Ellen H. Flottman, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Mary Moulton Bryan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Michael Peery, appeals from a jury trial conviction of burglary in the first degree, RSMo § 569.160 (1986), entered by the Circuit Court of Shelby County and for which appellant was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender, RSMo §§ 558.016 and 557.036.4 (Cum.Supp.1992), to fifteen years’ imprisonment.1 We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment of the circuit court is not clearly erroneous. As *401we further find an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the circuit court’s judgment pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).

1

. Although this is a consolidated appeal, appellant has failed to brief any points relating to denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evi-dentiary hearing. Points not briefed on appeal are deemed abandoned. *State v. Simmons,*861 S.W.2d 128, 130 (Mo.App.E.D.1993).
Latin America Ventures, Inc.: Exhibit 10.7 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com











Exhibit 10.7




(English Translation)




SIGHT LOAN 

JORGE ORELLANA E.I.R.L.

TO 

MINERA LICANCABUR S.A.




In Santiago de Chile on September 11, 2008, there appears JORGE ORELLANA E.I.R.L., RUT No. 76,458,450-3, represented by JORGE OSVALDO ORELLANA ORELLANA, IDENTITY CARD No. 6,784,858-6, for these purposes both domiciled at LATORRE No. 2077, CALAMA,
and in transit in this city, hereinafter “LENDER,” and MINERA LICANCABUR S.A., RUT No. 76,009,516-8, represented by JORGE OSVALDO ORELLANA ORELLANA, IDENTITY CARD No. 6,784,858-6, domiciled at LA PASTORA No. 121, OFFICE 201, LAS CONDES,
hereinafter the “BORROWER,” the deponents being of legal age, who prove their identity with the aforementioned identity cards and state: 


ONE: JORGE ORELLANA E.I.R.L. delivers to MINERA LICANCABUR S.A. the amount of $200,000,000 (TWO HUNDRED MILLION PESOS), which it receives to its full satisfaction accepts for itself. 


TWO: MINERA LICANCABUR S.A. undertakes and promises to refund the amount received on sight, without interest and without defined term. 


THREE: The expenses and taxes levied on this loan contract will be paid by the borrower. 


FOUR: For all legal purposes, the parties establish domicile in the community of Santiago in the Metropolitan Area. 


The tax levied on this loan was paid by form 24.1 FOLIO 0544782 

	
[stamp:]
		
 
	
	
ANTONIETA MENDOZA ESCALAS
		
 
	
	
NOTARY
		
 
	
	
CHILE
		
 
	
	
[signature] [fingerprint]
		
[signature] [fingerprint]
	

	
JORGE ORELLANA E.I.R.L.
	
	
MINERA LICANCABUR S.A.
	




I certify the signature of JORGE OSVALDO ORELLANA ORELLANA, IDENTITY CARD No. 6,784,858-6, in representation of JORGE ORELLANA E.I.R.L., as Lender, and in representation of MINERA LICANCABUR S.A., as Borrower 


SANTIAGO, SEPTEMBER 11, 2008. 


[stamp:] 

ANTONIETA MENDOZA ESCALAS

NOTARY PUBLIC 

16th NOTARY OF SANTIAGO
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-11345

Conference Calendar

 

MICHAEL A. SPEARMAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CO III P. SYLER; 

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE; 

WAYNE SCOTT, Director; 

MARK LAUGHLIN,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:96-CV-53-C

- - - - - - - - - -

June 17, 1997

Before SMITH, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Michael A. Spearman, Texas inmate number 530480, appeals the

partial final judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) for all

the defendants in their official capacities and for Defendants

Laughlin and Scott in their individual capacities. He argues

that his excessive-force claim should not have been dismissed as

frivolous. We have reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs
No. 96-11345

- 2 -

and AFFIRM for the reasons adopted by the district court. 

Spearman v. Syler, No. 5:96-CV-053-C (N.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 1996). 

Spearman's motions for a jury trial and for the production of

documents should be brought in the district court. His motions

to show that the defendants do not have immunity and for default

judgement are DENIED.
<PAGE>   1

EXHIBIT 23.1

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



The Board of Directors
St. Francis Capital Corporation:

         We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement
(No. 33-70012 and 333-24057) on Form S-8 of St. Francis Capital Corporation of
our report dated October 20, 2000, relating to the consolidated statements of
financial condition of St. Francis Capital Corporation and Subsidiary as of
September 30, 2000 and 1999, and the related consolidated statements of income,
changes in shareholders' equity and comprehensive income and cash flows for each
of the years in the three-year period ended September 30, 2000, which report
appears in the September 30, 2000 annual report on Form 10-K of St. Francis
Capital Corporation.



                                                                        KPMG LLP



Milwaukee, Wisconsin
December 18, 2000




                                       94
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-2018-0025-7040

Gatekeeper Systems, 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 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(b)
 CERTIFICATIONS
CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q (this Report) of Alpha Natural Resources, Inc. (the Registrant);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this Report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this Report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the 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 defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this Report is being prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this Report based on
such evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this Report any change in the Registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the Registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
Registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants internal
control over financial reporting;
 5.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officer 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; andb.
    
    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.
 /s/ David C. StuebeDavid C. StuebeVice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)  42
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATIONS OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lucas Energy, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Malek, 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, 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; and

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

/S/ MALEK BOHSALIMalek BohsaliChief Financial OfficerFebruary 13, 2009

1

---
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7559

SGRE, 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 the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

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

General Counsel
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification of the Chief Executive Officer**

**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 WMG Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endedMarch 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edgar Bronfman, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

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

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

Dated: May 10,2011