alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 98 (Monday, May 20, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25242]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12579]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Financial Services Technology Consortium, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on March 11, 1996 and April 12, 1996, 
pursuant to Sec. 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), the 
Financial Services Technology Consortium, Inc., has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, the changes are as 
follows: Global Concepts, Inc., Atlanta, GA; Marquette Direct, 
Minneapolis, MN; NNT Data Communications, Palo Alto, CA; Oracle Corp., 
El Segundo, CA; and Bottomline Technologies, Inc., Portsmouth, NH have 
been added to the venture.
    On October 21, 1993, the Financial Services Technology Consortium 
filed its original notification pursuant to Sec. 6(a) of the Act. The 
Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register 
pursuant to Sec. 6(b) of the Act on December 14, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg. 
65399).
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 96-12579 Filed 5-17-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
Case 2:17-cr-01451-SPL Document 1 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01451-SPL Document 1 Filed 10/16/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01451-SPL Document 1 Filed 10/16/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01451-SPL Document 1 Filed 10/16/17 Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 accompanying Annual Report of Global Teledata
Corporation (the "Registrant") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Annual Report"), I, Dennis Crowley, Principal Executive
Officer and the Principal Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

         (1) The Annual 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 Annual Report fully presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.


Dated: March 31, 2003                     By: /s/ Dennis Crowley
                                              -------------------------------
                                              Dennis Crowley
                                              Principal Executive Officer and
                                              Principal Financial Officer
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 Eye Institute Special Emphasis Panel; BRAIN Initiative: New Concepts and Early-Stage Research for Recording and Modulation in the Nervous System (R21).                    

*Date:*                         July 20, 2021.                    

*Time:*                         12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Division of Extramural Research, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Brian Hoshaw, Ph.D., Designated Federal Official, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Division of Extramural Research, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-2020,                         *hoshawb@mail.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: June 10, 2021. 

Melanie J. Pantoja,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2021-12625 Filed 6-15-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in the registration statements 333-43718 and 333-70376 on Form S-8 of
CorVu Corporation of our report dated August 27, 2003, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of CorVu Corporation and subsidiaries as of June 30,
2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders' deficit and cash flows for the years then ended, which report
appears in the June 30, 2003 annual report on Form 10-KSB of CorVu Corporation.



                                              /s/ VIRCHOW, KRAUSE & COMPANY, LLP


Minneapolis, Minnesota
September 17, 2003
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. David WASHINGTON, Defendant/Appellant. David WASHINGTON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

Nos. 61386, 64229.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

March 15, 1994.

Rehearing Denied April 11, 1994.

Tamara Detloff, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., F. Martin Dajani, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his conviction by a jury of tampering in the first degree, § 569.090.-1(2), RSMo 1986. The court sentenced him as a prior and persistent offender to a prison term of six years. He also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. We have reviewed the record and find defendant’s claims of error to be without merit; no error of law appears. The judgment of the motion court is based upon findings of fact and conclusions of law which are not clearly erroneous. 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 Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
Case 2:17-cv-04040-GMS Document 1 Filed 11/02/17 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:17-cv-04040-GMS Document 1 Filed 11/02/17 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:17-cv-04040-GMS Document 1 Filed 11/02/17 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:17-cv-04040-GMS Document 1 Filed 11/02/17 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:17-cv-04040-GMS Document 1 Filed 11/02/17 Page 5 of 5
<Page>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.3.1


                      CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION

This Consent to Assignment and Assumption ("Consent"), dated September 26, 2001,
by and among Tenaska Georgia Partners, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership
("Tenaska"), and Exelon Generation Company, LLC, a Pennsylvania Limited
Liability Company ("ExGen"), memorializes the consent to assignment to and
assumption by ExGen of the rights and obligations of PECO Energy Company, a
Pennsylvania corporation ("PECO Energy"), arising under certain contracts
described below. Tenaska and PECO Energy are parties to the following agreements
(the "Assigned Contracts"):

     (1)  Power Purchase Agreement dated August 24, 1999, as amended or modified
          by certain agreements, including those listed on Annex A;

     (2)  Consent and Agreement, dated as of November 10, 1999, among PECO
          Energy, Tenaska and The Chase Manhattan Bank, as Collateral Agent.

ExGen acknowledges that pursuant to the Assignment and Assumption Agreement (the
"Agreement") dated January 1, 2001, by and among PECO Energy and ExGen, which is
incorporated herein by reference, ExGen has made a full and irrevocable
assumption of the Assigned Contracts and PECO Energy's rights and obligations
thereunder relating to the period after the Effective Date (as defined in the
Agreement).

Tenaska hereby acknowledges that the assignments and assumptions relative to the
Assigned Contracts provided for under the Agreement are permitted by the
Assigned Contracts, and releases PECO Energy from obligations to Tenaska under
the Assigned Contracts relating to the period after the Effective Date (as
defined in the Agreement).

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Consent to Assignment and
Assumption as of the date first written above.

TENASKA GEORGIA PARTNERS, L.P.

By:     TENASKA GEORGIA, INC.
        Managing General Partner

By:     /s/ Michael F. Lawler
        --------------------------
Title:  Vice President of Finance & Treasurer

EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC

By:     /s/ Ian P. Mclean
        --------------------------
Title:  President, Exelon Power Team

<Page>

                                                                         ANNEX A

     1.   March 15, 2001 letter regarding operation of the Tenaska plant on fuel
          oil.

     2.   April 12, 2001 confirming the parties' understanding with respect to
          the peak availability period, and energy deliveries during ramp up and
          ramp down hours.

     3.   May 30, 2001 letter revising March 15, 2001 letter referred to above.

     4.   May 31, 2001 letter declaring contract capacity for the first contract
          year.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 21, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25495]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12686]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Citizens Advisory Committee on Public Health Service Activities 
and Research at Department of Energy (DOE) Sites: Idaho National 
Engineering Laboratory Health Effects Subcommittee

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announce the following meeting.
    Name: Citizens Advisory Committee on Public Health Service 
Activities and Research at Department of Energy (DOE) Sites: Idaho 
National Engineering Laboratory Health Effects Subcommittee (INEL).
    Times and Dates: 8 a.m.-5 p.m., June 5, 1996; 7 p.m.-9 p.m., June 
5, 1996; 8 a.m.-12:15 p.m., June 6, 1996.
    Place: Quality Inn Pocatello Park Hotel, 1555, Pocatello Creek 
Road, Pocatello, Idaho 83201.
    Status: Open to the public, limited only by the space available. 
The meeting room accommodates approximately 50 people.
    Purpose: The Subcommittee is charged with providing advice and 
recommendations to the Director, CDC, and the Administrator, ATSDR, 
regarding community, American Indian Tribes, and labor concerns 
pertaining to CDC's and ATSDR's public health activities and research 
at respective DOE sites. Activities shall focus on providing a forum 
for community, American Indian Tribal, and labor interaction and serve 
as a vehicle for community concern to be expressed as advice and 
recommendations to CDC and ATSDR.
    Matters To Be Discussed: Agenda items include: the Biological 
Effects of Radiation--Radionuclides releases other than plutonium that 
could cause health effects, declassification issues, high efficiency 
particulate air filters, environmental monitoring--past and present, 
discussion of Phase I, and other than radionuclides present at INEL 
(e.g., chemicals: most toxic and carcinogenic).
    Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.
    Contact Persons For More Information: Arthur J. Robinson or Nadine 
Dickerson, Radiation Studies Branch, Division of Environmental Hazards 
and Health Effects, NCEH, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, M/S F-35, 
Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3724, telephone 770/488-7040, FAX 770/488-7044.

    Dated: May 15, 1996.
John C. Burckhardt,
Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
[FR Doc. 96-12686 Filed 5-20-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-M
**Exhibit 32.1**

**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 Dental Patient Care America, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael Silva, 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, 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/ Michael Silva 

Chief Executive Officer

March 28, 2007
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 97-10136

Summary Calendar

_____________________

JAMES ERIC LOFTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DAVID LOFTON, CO 3; JOSEPH LAUGHLIN; STANLEY H.

WENDELL, Lt.; KIMBERLY ADAMS; RONALD DREWRY;

CHARLES BELL, Asst. Warden; CRAIG RAINES,

Assistant Warden; JAMES McGONAGILL; MARIANNE

MUNSELLE; JOHN DOE; GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL

DIVISION; JAIME QUINTANILLA, Captain; TERRY H. WORDEN;

SAMMY G. GOMEZ; ERIC HAMILTON; DARREN D. PORTER;

DEBBEE M. HARMS, Craft Shop Supervisor; CLIFTON

HOLLEY; SHERMAN L. ISENBURG, Lt.; GARY DODDS, Lt.;

MICHAEL EULENFELD; WADE S. HAYNES; BOBBY MORRISON,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(1:96-CV-321)

_________________________________________________________________

December 17, 1997

Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James Eric Lofton, Texas prisoner # 616132, appeals an order

of the district court requiring him to pay, in monthly
- 2 -

installments, the full filing fee in the district court to commence

his pro se, in forma pauperis civil rights action. The Prison

Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) amended 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to require a

prisoner seeking to bring a civil action to pay the full amount of

a filing fee. See § 1915(b)(1) and (2). The PLRA applies to this

case, and the district court did not err by assessing the full

filing fee. The motions for appointment of counsel, for injunctive

relief, and to expedite the appeal are DENIED.

Lofton’s appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous.

See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because

the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. We

caution Lofton that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him

or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid

sanctions, Lofton is further cautioned to review any pending

appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are

frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS DENIED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED
**Exhibit      32.1**

| (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 results of operations of the                Company. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                    |                               |                                 |
|-----------------------------------------|------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| Dated:                February 16, 2007 | By:                      | /s/              Patrick A. Galliher |
|                                    | Patrick                A. Galliher |
|                                    | President                          |

----
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed January 4, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D22-44 Lower Tribunal No. 19-14656

________________ 

### Servis One, Inc., etc. , Appellant,
vs. 

### JL International Investments, LLC ,

Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Gina Beovides, Judge. Ghidotti | Berger LLP, and Chase A. Berger, Tara Rosenfeld, and Jason L. Duggar, for appellant. Neil Rose (Hollywood); Howard S. Weinstein P.A., and Howard S. Weinstein (Hollywood), for appellee. Before EMAS, HENDON and MILLER, JJ. PER CURIAM.2

Affirmed. See Jersey Palm-Gross, Inc. v. Paper, 658 So. 2d 531, 535 (Fla. 1995) (holding that “a usury savings clause cannot, by itself, absolutely insulate a lender from a finding of usury . . . . Rather, [it is] one factor to be considered in the overall determination of whether the lender intended to exact a usurious interest rate;” further observing “that a contrary holding would permit a lender to ‘relieve himself of the pains and penalties visited by law upon such an act by merely writing into the contract a disclaimer of any intention to do that which under his contract he has plainly done.’”) (Additional citations omitted.)
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Deborah H. Brown, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Arizona Department of Corrections, 

Defendant. 

No. CV-17-04298-PHX-DKD

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s Complaint, (Doc. 1), Application for 

Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, (Doc. 2), and United States Magistrate Judge David 

K. Duncan’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), which recommends dismissal of the 

Complaint without prejudice, (Doc. 12). The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff that she 

had fourteen (14) days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely 

objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 2 

(citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b); United States v. ReynaTapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)). 

 Plaintiff did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review 

the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) 

(“Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the 

subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de 

novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). 

The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court 
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

will accept the R&R and dismiss the Complaint without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in 

part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) 

(“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive 

further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”). 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judge Duncan’s R&R (Doc. 12) is 

ACCEPTED and Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Application for Leave to Proceed in 

Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) is denied as moot. 

 Dated this 22nd day of February, 2018. 

Honorable G. Murray Snow

United States District Judge
#### Hotel Ten Park Avenue, Inc., Landlord, Appellant, *v.*Robert Tepper, Tenant, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

November 3, 1955.

*752
      *Sigmund Moses*and *Hyman W. Sobell*for appellant.

*Morris J. Fellner*and *Theodore Daniels*for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The lease under which tenant went into possession provided for the payment of a variable rent based upon the volume of the tenant’s business and, in addition, for the payment of a fixed, basic or minimum rent, and was subject to all of the provisions of. the Business Bent Law (L. 1945, ch. 314, as amd.). The fact that the lease provided that the annual rent for the first three years of the term was $5,000 and $6,000 for the last two years, did not make it a graduated lease within the statutory concept of a graduated lease *(Matter of 500 Fifth Ave. [Wise Shoe Co.],*274 App. Div. 241, affd. 300 N. Y. 491).

The emergency rent is the annual rent paid on June 1, 1944, that is, $5,000, plus 15% of said amount, making a total of $5,750, not, as landlord claims, 15% of $6,000, the amount payable at the time the lease expired. An additional increase of 15% is allowed landlord by reason of the amendment to section 2 of the Business Bent Law (L. 1954, ch. 447). This amounts to $6,612.50 per annum.

The landlord having claimed an erroneous amount in the petition, the final order should be affirmed, without costs, and without prejudice to a new proceeding to collect the correct amount.

*753The final order should be affirmed, without costs, without prejudice to a new proceeding.

Eder, Schreiber and Hecht, JJ., concur.

Final order affirmed, etc.