alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 7, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 20526]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11270]



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


FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of Banks 
or Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. Once the notices have been accepted for 
processing, they will also be available for inspection at the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views 
in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later 
than May 21, 1996.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Randall C. Sumner, Vice 
President) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166:
    1. F. Gilbert Bickel, III and Martha W. Bickel, of St. Louis, 
Missouri; to acquire an additional 31.52 percent, for a total of 35.61 
percent of the voting shares of St. Johns Bancshares, Inc., St. Louis, 
Missouri, and thereby indirectly acquire St. Johns Bank & Trust 
Company, St. Louis, Missouri.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 1, 1996.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 96-11270 Filed 5-6-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
Order filed September 5, 2013 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00509-CV

____________

ENZO INVESTMENTS, LP, Appellant

V.

CHARLES WHITE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 152nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2009-08290

O R D E R

The notice of appeal in this case was filed June 7, 2013. The clerk’s record 

was filed July 26, 2013. To date, the filing fee of $175.00 has not been paid. 

Therefore, the court issues the following order. 

Appellant is ordered to pay the filing fee in the amount of $175.00 to the 

Clerk of this court on or before September 18, 2013. See Tex. R. App. P. 5. If 
appellant fails to timely pay the filing fee in accordance with this order, the appeal 

will be dismissed.

PER CURIAM
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 87 (Friday, May 3, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19920-19921]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11057]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. OR96-12-000]


Total Petroleum, Inc. v. Citgo Products Pipeline Company and 
Williams Pipe Line Company; Notice of Complaint

April 29, 1996.
    Take notice that on April 19, 1996, Total Petroleum, Inc. (Total) 
filed a complaint pursuant to section 13(l) of the Interstate Commerce 
Act (ICA), section 1803 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, and Rule 206 
of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure against Citgo 
Products Pipeline Company (Citgo) and Williams Pipe Line Company L.P. 
(Williams) in the above-referenced docket.
    Total alleges that Citgo has proposed major changes to its 
proration policy without first seeking approval of such changes through 
amendment of its tariff, and that this is a violation of section 6 of 
the ICA. Total further alleges that the new proration policy and the 
timing of the change is unduly preferential toward certain shippers, 
including Citgo's affiliate, Citgo Petroleum Corporation. Total further 
asserts that the proposed change has reduced the capacity on Citgo that 
Total can reliably obtain from approximately 200,000 barrels per month 
to 53,000 barrels per month. To avoid the resulting reduction in its 
nominations, Total requests the Commission to take immediate action 
directing Citgo to cease and desist from implementing its new proration 
policy and to return to its pre-existing policy until lawfully changed.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest the instant complaint 
should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 214 and 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure. All such

[[Page 19921]]

motions or protests should be filed on or before May 20, 1996. 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 filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. Answers to this complaint shall be 
due on or before May 20, 1996.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-11057 Filed 5-2-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Larry D. GRINDER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 46676.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

April 20, 1993.

Gary E. Brotherton, Office of State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Michael J. Runzi, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SHANGLER, P.J., and TURNAGE and KENNEDY, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from the denial of Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 7, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20526-20527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11284]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Announces the Following Meeting

    Name: ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee.
    Time and Date: 9 a.m.-5 p.m., June 6, 1996.
    Place: Room 703A, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence 
Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20201.
    Status: Open.
    Purpose: The ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee 
will be holding its first meeting of the year. This meeting is a 
public forum for the presentation of proposed modifications to the 
International Classification of Diseases, ninth-revision, clinical 
modification.
    Notice: In the interest of security, the Department has 
instituted stringent procedures for entrance into the Hubert H. 
Humphrey building by non-government employees. Thus, persons without 
a government identification card should plan to arrive at the 
building either between 8:30 and 9 a.m. or 12:30 and 1 p.m. so they 
can be escorted to the meeting room. Entrance to the meeting at 
other times during the day cannot be assured.

[[Page 20527]]

    Contact Person for More Information: Substantive program 
information may be obtained from Donna Pickett, Co-chair, ICD-9-CM 
Coordination and Maintenance Committee, NCHS, CDC, Room 1100, 
Presidential Building, 6525 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, Maryland 
20782, telephone 301/436-7050, extension 142.

    Dated: April 30, 1996.
Carolyn J. Russell,
Director, Management Analysist and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention (CDC).
[FR Doc. 96-11284 Filed 5-6-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-18-M
#### Theodore ABBOTT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 41515.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 25, 1989.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Aug. 29, 1989.

John L. Vohs, Asst. Public Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Christopher M. Kehr, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before CLARK, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and BERREY, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from denial of Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without a hearing.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00749-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF C.G. and B.G., Children

From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011-CI-06759

Honorable Barbara Hanson Nellermoe, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI, JUSTICE MARION, AND JUSTICE ALVAREZ

We withdraw our opinion and judgment dated June 4, 2014. In accordance with this court’s 

opinion of this date, (1) the trial court’s “Order Modifying Parent-Child Relationship” is 

REVERSED; (2) judgment is RENDERED that Shaun Gifford’s “Petition to Modify Parent-Child 

Relationship” is DENIED; and (3) the trial court’s “Order Holding [Loretta DiDonato] in 

Contempt and Granting Judgment for Child Support Arrearage and Attorney’s Fees” is 

AFFIRMED.

Costs of appeal are assessed against the party that incurred them.

SIGNED August 13, 2014.

_____________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
#### Deborah STEPHENSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 66991.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

July 11, 1995.

Dave Hemingway, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cheryl A. Caponegro, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

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

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Deborah Stephenson, appeals from the denial of her Rule 24.035 motion by the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, specifically challenging the circuit court’s refusal to allow her to withdraw her guilty plea as required by Rule 24.02(d)(4). We affirm. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the order of the circuit court is supported by substantial evidence and is not clearly erroneous. As we further find no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion, we affirm the circuit court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 31.1
                  Certification of Principal Executive Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)



I, Anthony Brandon Escobar, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of TRAFALGAR
RESOURCES, 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 and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) 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 those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

          (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

          (c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

     5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee
of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

          (a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors, any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

          (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and

     6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: May 15, 2007             /s/ Anthony Brandon Escobar
                                -------------------------------------
                                President and Chief Executive Officer
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19-1341V

Filed: August 17, 2020

UNPUBLISHED

PHILLIP SHAAK,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Jordan P. Wartman, Handler, Henning & Rosenberg, LLC, Harrisburg, PA, for petitioner.

Traci R. Patton, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

ORDER CONCLUDING PROCEEDINGS1

On September 3, 2019, petitioner filed a petition under the National Childhood 

Vaccine Injury Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10-34 (2012), alleging that petitioner suffered 

severe pain, weakness, and numbness in his upper left arm and fingers as a result from 

his receipt of the influenza (“flu”) vaccination on October 14, 2016. (ECF No. 1.) This 

case was originally assigned to the Special Processing Unit (“SPU”). (ECF No. 21.) 

However, this case was reassigned to my docket on March 2, 2020. (ECF No. 24.) 

On June 16, 2020, a status conference was held, where I discussed the case 

with the parties and ordered petitioner to file additional records and materials. (ECF No. 

37.) On August 17, 2020, petitioner filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal. (ECF No. 

38.) 

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this case, it will 

be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government 

Act of 2002. See 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic 

Government Services). This means the decision will be available to anyone with access to the 

Internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact 

medical or other information the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. 

If the special master, upon review, agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, it will be 

redacted from public access.

Special Master Horner

Order Concluding Proceedings; 

Vaccine Rule 21(a)
2

Accordingly, pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a), this case is hereby dismissed 

without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is hereby instructed that a judgment shall 

not enter in the instant case pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Daniel T. Horner

Daniel T. Horner

Special Master
EXHIBIT 32.1 CEO Certifications Under Section 906

                            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 Annual Report of OmniNet Media Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending August 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Mitchell Stough, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my
knowledge 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.

Date: April 21, 2006

By: /s/ Mitchell Stough
   ---------------------
Name: Mitchell Stough
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 31.2


Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


I, C. Richard Neely, Jr., certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Intermolecular, Inc.; and


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.





Date: December 13, 2013/s/ C. RICHARD NEELY, JR.C. Richard Neely, Jr.Chief Financial Officer
IB 

Union Calendar No. 211 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5734 

[Report No. 118–262] 

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to extend the 

Administrative Fine Program for certain reporting violations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 

Mr. STEIL (for himself and Mr. MORELLE) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

NOVEMBER 2, 2023 

Reported from the Committee on House Administration; committed to the 

Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered 

to be printed 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 5734 RH

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to 

extend the Administrative Fine Program for certain reporting violations. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 5734 RH

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF ADMINISTRATIVE FINE PRO4 GRAM. 

5 Section 309(a)(4)(C)(v) of the Federal Election Cam6 paign Act of 1971 (52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(4)(C)(v)) is 

7 amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 2023’’ and inserting 

8 ‘‘December 31, 2033’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Union Calendar No. 211 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5734 

[Report No. 118–262] 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 

for certain reporting violations. 1971 to extend the Administrative Fine Program 

NOVEMBER 2, 2023 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### Reginald GRIFFIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 49507.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Nov. 8, 1994.

Gary E. Brotherton, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., David G. Brown, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

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

*225
      *ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from the denial of a Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 10.8

	
  
 
  	
  
BB&T
  
	
  
 
  	
  
Branch Banking & Trust Co.
  
	
  
 
  	
  
505 S. Duke Street 
  
	
  
 
  	
  
Durham, NC 27701
  
	
  
 
  	
  
(919) 887-7800
  





	
  
 
  	
  
November   2, 2006
  





	
  
Mr. Don   T. Seaquist
  
	
  
Vice   President, Finance & Administration
  
	
  
Embrex,   Inc.
  
	
  
1040   Swabia Road
  
	
  
Durham,   NC  27703
  




Re:  Current Ratio covenant 


Dear Mr. Seaquist:


With regard to the Current Ratio covenant (i.e., a ratio of total current assets to total current liabilities of not less than 2.0 to 1.0) as specified in the Loan Agreements dated April 7, 1999, (and al1 subsequent addendums) and August 6, 2003, each of which was executed by and between Branch Banking and Trust Company (''Bank") and Embrex, Inc. ("Borrower"), the Bank hereby waives the Current Ratio covenant requirement for the third quarter ending September 30, 2006.  Additionally, the Current Ratio covenant will be waived beginning October 1, 2006, until the last day of the current quarter (i.e., December 31, 2006).  On December 31, 2006, the Current Ratio covenant will then be enforceable per the terms and conditions of the aforementioned Loan Agreements.


Any questions regarding this matter may be directed to me at 919/687-7221.  Thank you.


Sincerely,

	
  
/s/ Earl   W. Tye
  	
  
 
  
	
  


  	
   
  
	
  Earl W.   Tye
  	
   
  
	
  Senior   Vice President
  	
   
  
	
  City   Executive
  	
   
  
	
  Durham
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 88 (Monday, May 6, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11201]



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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[OH93-1-7290b; FRL-5467-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve the Particulate Matter contingency 
measures State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the 
State of Ohio on July 17, 1995. This submittal addresses the Federal 
Clean Air Act requirement to submit contingency measures for 
particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a 
nominal 10 micrometers (PM) for the areas designated as nonattainment 
for the PM National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Contingency 
measures are emission reductions which are to be implemented, with no 
further action, in the event that an area fails to meet air quality 
standards. In the final rules section of this Federal Register, the EPA 
is approving this action as a direct final rule without prior proposal 
because EPA views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no 
adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in 
the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response 
to that direct final rule, no further activity is contemplated in 
relation to this proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse comments, the 
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received 
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed 
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. 
Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at 
this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before 
June 5, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to: J. Elmer Bortzer, 
Chief, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    Copies of the State submittal and EPA's analysis of it are 
available for inspection at: Regulation Development Section, Air 
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 
5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Pohlman, Regulation Development 
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, 
(312) 886-3299.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the direct 
final rule published in the rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: April 19, 1996.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-11201 Filed 5-03-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P