alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 101 (Thursday, May 23, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25853]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12907]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-182-005]


ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

May 17, 1996.
    Take notice that on May 15, 1996, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) 
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised 
Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective May 1, 
1996:

Fourth Revised Sheet No. 90
Original Sheet No. 90A
Second Revised Sheet No. 103
Third Revised Sheet No. 112
Third Revised Sheet No. 119
Third Revised Sheet No. 120
Third Revised Sheet No. 121
Third Revised Sheet No. 122
Original Sheet No. 122A
Second Revised Sheet No. 123
Third Revised Sheet No. 153
First Revised Sheet No. 153A

    ANR states that the above-referenced tariff sheets are being filed 
pursuant to the Commission's April 25, 1996 ``Order Accepting and 
Suspending Compliance Filing, Subject to Condition'' in the captioned 
proceeding. ANR states that the revised tariff sheets address directed 
changes to ANR's tariff provisions regarding the segmentation of 
capacity.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed in accordance 
with Section 154.209 of the Commission's Regulations. 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. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-12907 Filed 5-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 14, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 24342]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12039]



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


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application To Withdraw From Listing 
and Registration; (Horizon Mental Health Management, Inc., Common 
Stock, $.01 Par Value) File No. 1-13626

May 9, 1996.
    The Horizon Mental Health Management, Inc. (``Company'') has filed 
an application with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 12(d) of the Securities Exchange 
Act of 1934 (``Act'') and Rule 12d2-2(d) promulgated thereunder, to 
withdraw the above specified security (``Security'') from listing and 
registration on the American Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Amex'').
    The reasons alleged in the application for withdrawing the Security 
from listing and registration include the following:
    According to the Company, its Board of Directors unanimously 
approved resolutions on March 21, 1996 to withdraw the Security from 
listing and registration on the Amex and to list the Security on the 
Nasdaq/NMS. The decision of the Board was based upon the belief that 
listing of the Security on the Nasdaq/NMS will be beneficial to the 
stockholders of the Company by:
    (a) increasing the liquidity of the Security;
    (b) capitalizing on a screen based market offered by the Nasdaq/NMS 
as opposed to the more site specific auction type market afforded by 
Amex; and
    (c) increasing the visibility of the Security.
    Any interested person may, on or before June 3, 1996, submit by 
letter to the Secretary of the Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 
Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549, facts bearing upon whether 
the application has been made in accordance with the rules of the Amex 
and what terms, if any, should be imposed by the Commission for the 
protection of investors. The Commission, based on the information 
submitted to it, will issue an order granting the application after the 
date mentioned above, unless the Commission determines to order a 
hearing on the matter.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, 
pursuant to delegated authority.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-12039 Filed 5-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
* 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. 97-10136 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 , i n 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. S ee § 1915(b)(1) and (2). The PLRA applies to this

cas e, 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 D ISMISSED

. 5 T H C IR

. 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
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 375 

Supporting the goals and ideals of Workers’ Memorial Day in order to 

honor and remember the workers who have been killed or injured in 

the workplace. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 28, 2009 

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas (for herself, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, 

Ms. LINDA T. SA ́NCHEZ of California, Mr. MICHAUD, Mr. LYNCH, Mr. 

GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. HARE, Mr. LOEBSACK, Mr. CARSON

of Indiana, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. AL GREEN of 

Texas, Mr. COURTNEY, Ms. SUTTON, and Mr. GUTIERREZ) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education 

and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of Workers’ Memorial Day 

in order to honor and remember the workers who have 

been killed or injured in the workplace. 

Whereas, each year, more than 5,500 workers are killed due 

to workplace-related injuries in the United States, and 

more than 2,000,000 workers across the world die of 

workplace-related accidents and diseases; 

Whereas, each day, an average of 16 workers are killed due 

to workplace injuries in the United States; 

Whereas there are more than 4,000,000 occupational injuries 

and illnesses in the United States annually; 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 375 IH 

Whereas tens of thousands of Americans with workplace injuries or illness become permanently disabled; 

Whereas more people are killed worldwide each year at work 

than in wars; 

Whereas observing Workers’ Memorial Day allows us to 

honor and remember victims of workplace injuries and 

disease; and 

Whereas observing Workers’ Memorial Day reminds us of the 

need to strive for better worker safety and health protections: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideals of Workers’ 

3 Memorial Day to honor and remember workers who 

4 have been killed or injured in the workplace; 

5 (2) recognizes the importance of worker health 

6 and safety standards; 

7 (3) encourages the Occupational Safety and 

8 Health Administration, industries, employers and 

9 employees to support activities aimed at increasing 

10 awareness of the importance of preventing illness, 

11 injury, and death in the workplace; and 

12 (4) calls upon the people of the United States 

13 to observe such a day with appropriate ceremonies 

14 and respect. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
N OTE : This o rder is non precedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

ELBERT HICKS, Petitioner,

v.

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Respondent.

______________________

2014

- 3017

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
Board in No. PH

- 3443

- 12

- 0485 -I- 1.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

Upon consideration of petitioner’s motion for leave to file his brief out of time,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
The motion is granted. The principal brief is accepted for filing. USPS should calculate the due date for its response brief from the date of filing of this order. Case: 14-3017 Document: 20 Page: 1 Filed: 08/11/2014HICKS v. USPS 2

F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole
Daniel E. O’Toole
Clerk of Court

s27 Case: 14-3017 Document: 20 Page: 2 Filed: 08/11/2014
Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with this Quarterly Report of Fit For Business International, Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending March 31, 2006, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Mark A. Poulsen,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the Company,  certifies to the
best of his knowledge,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1.   Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31,
          2006, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
          the period ending March 31, 2006, fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Fit For
          Business International, Inc.

Dated:  May 22, 2006

/s/ Mark A. Poulsen
-------------------
Mark A. Poulsen
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1
     DAC TECHNOLOGIES GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of DAC Technologies Group InternationalInc (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), David A. Collins Chief Executive Officerof the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.
          /s/ David A. Collins
#### STATE of Texas, Appellant, v. Jesus Aleman FLORES, Appellee.

No. 11-92-164-CR.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Eastland.

June 24, 1993.

Rehearing Denied July 22, 1993.

Ben D. Sudderth, Comanche, Martin L. Peterson, Stephenville, for appellant.

G. Lee Haney, Dist. Atty., Brownwood, for appellee.

OPINION

DICKENSON, Justice.

The trial court sustained a motion to suppress evidence, and the State appeals. We affirm.

The grand jury indicted Jesus Aleman Flores on September 6, 1991, for capital murder, aggravated robbery, and sexual assault in connection with the death of Donna Mae Inlow on April 27, 1981, based in part upon the results of DNA tests of Flores’ blood. The State secured its first blood sample from Flores pursuant to a search warrant issued on June 24, 1985. This was before the DNA testing procedure had been developed, and that blood sample was not sufficiently preserved for DNA testing. After the Dallas Court of Appeals recognized the validity of DNA testing in *Glover v. State,*787 S.W.2d 544 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1990), *aff'd,*825 S.W.2d 127 (Tex.Cr.App.1992), the State secured its second blood sample from Flores, the blood which was used for DNA testing, pursuant to a search warrant issued on January 10, 1991.

Flores moved to suppress the second blood sample, citing Tex.Code Crim.PRO. Ann. art. 18.01(d) (Vernon 1977) which provides:

> Only the specifically described property or items set forth in a search warrant issued under Subdivision (10) of Article 18.02 of this code or property or items enumerated in Subdivisions (1) through (9) of Article 18.02 of this code may be seized. *Subsequent search warrants may not be issued pursuant to Subdivision (10) of Article 18.02 of this code to search the same person, place, or thing*
>       *615
>       *subjected, to a prior search under Subdivision (10) of Article 18.02 of this code.*(Emphasis added)

Tex.Code CRIm.Pro.Ann. art. 18.02(10) (Vernon Supp.1993) authorizes a warrant to search for and seize:

> [P]roperty or items, except the personal writings by the accused, constituting evidence of an offense or constituting evidence tending to show that a particular person committed an offense.

The State asked the trial court to create an exception to prohibition of subsequent search warrants which is contained in Article 18.01(d). The trial court followed the statutory law quoted above. The State argues a sole point of error in its brief on appeal, asking this court to hold that the trial court erred in sustaining the defendant’s motion to suppress. This court must also follow the statutory law; consequently, the sole point of error is overruled.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT SHERM AN P. HAW K INS,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lla

nt, v. DAVID PENTLAND; e t a l.,

De fe nda n ts-Appe lle e s. No. 15-35725 D.C . No. 6:14-c v-00069-DLC M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of M o nta

na Dana L . C hriste nse n, C hie f Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d July 26, 2016 ** B e fore : SC HR O EDER , C ANB Y, a n d C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s. She rm an P. Ha

wkins, a M onta na sta te prisone r, a

ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t c o urt’ s judgm e n t in his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c tion a lle ging due proc e ss viola tions a rising out of a

disc iplina

ry he aring. W e hav e jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re v ie w de n ovo a dism issa l unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1915A, Re snic k 

# FIL ED AUG 04 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).v . Hay e

s , 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th C ir. 2000), a nd we a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dism isse d Ha

wkins’ s a c tion be c a

u se Hawkins fa ile d to a lle g e fa c ts suffic ie nt to show tha t de fe nda nts viola te d his due proc e ss rights. Se e Supe r inte n de nt v . Hill , 472 U.S. 445, 455 (1985) (re quire m e nts of due proc e s s a re satisfie d if “ som e e v ide nc e ” supports the disc iplina

ry de c ision); W

olff v . Mc D onne ll , 418 U.S. 539, 563-70 (1974) (se tting forth dueproc e ss re quire m e nts for prison disc iplina

ry he aring proc e dure s). The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in dism issing Ha wkins’ s c om pla i nt without le a ve to a

m e nd be c a

use am e ndm e nt would be futile . Se e C e rv ante s v . C o untry w ide HomeLoans, Inc ., 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th C ir. 2011) (se tting forth sta

nda rd of re vie wand e xpla ining tha t dism issa l without le ave to am e nd is prope r whe n am e ndm e nt would befutile ). W e do not c onside r argum e nts a n d a l le gations ra ise d for the first tim e on a ppe a l. Se e Padge tt v . W

right , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th C ir. 2009). Hawkins’ s re que st for a

ppointm e n t of c ounse l , file d on M ay 16, 2016, is de nie d. Hawkins’ s re que st to filea substitute

brie f, file d on July

18, 2016, is denie d a s unne c e ssa

ry . AFFIRM E D. 1 5 - 3 5 7 2 5 2
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 97 (Friday, May 17, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12436]



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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION


Aviation Proceedings; Agreements Filed During the Week Ending 5/
10/96

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of 
Transportation under the provisions of 49 U.S.C 412 and 414. Answers 
may be filed within 21 days of date of filing.

Docket Number: OST-96-1358
Date filed: May 7, 1996
Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association
Subject:
    CAC/Reso/184 dated April 22, 1996
    Finally Adopted Resolutions R1-8
    Minutes--CAC/Meet/114 dated April 22, 1996
    Intended effective date: October 1, 1996
Paulette V. Twine,
Chief, Documentary Services Division.
[FR Doc. 96-12436 Filed 5-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

JEFFREY R. WENK AND LEE ANN WENK 

A/K/A LEE ANN MADDEN,

Petitioners

v.

STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY 

COMPANY AND H.J.M. ENTERPRISES, 

INC. TDBA FIREDEX OF PITTSBURGH,

 Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 127 WAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

JEFFREY R. WENK AND LEE ANN WENK 

A/K/A LEE ANN MADDEN,

Petitioners

v.

STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY 

COMPANY AND H.J.M. ENTERPRISES, 

INC. TDBA FIREDEX OF PITTSBURGH,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 128 WAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court
[127 WAL 2020, 128 WAL 2020 and 129 WAL 2020] - 2

JEFFREY R. WENK AND LEE ANN WENK 

A/K/A LEE ANN MADDEN,

Petitioners

v.

STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY 

COMPANY AND H.J.M. ENTERPRISES, 

INC. TDBA FIREDEX OF PITTSBURGH,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 129 WAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of November, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 14, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24270-24271]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11937]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board
[Order No. 817]


Grant of Authority for Subzone Status; Custom Manufacturing 
Services, Lucent Technologies Inc. (Telecommunications and Computer 
Equipment) Whitsett, North Carolina

     Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of 
June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones 
Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:
    Whereas, by an Act of Congress approved June 18, 1934, an Act ``To 
provide for the establishment * * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of 
entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, 
and for other purposes,'' as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u) (the Act), the 
Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) is authorized to grant to 
qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade 
zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs ports of entry;

[[Page 24271]]

    Whereas, the Board's regulations (15 CFR Part 400) provide for the 
establishment of special-purpose subzones when existing zone facilities 
cannot serve the specific use involved;
    Whereas, an application from the Triangle J Council of Governments, 
grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 93, for authority to establish special-
purpose subzone status at the telecommunications and computer equipment 
manufacturing facility of the Custom Manufacturing Services unit of 
Lucent Technologies Inc., in Whitsett, North Carolina, was filed by the 
Board on March 27, 1995, and notice inviting public comment was given 
in the Federal Register (FTZ Docket 9-95, 60 FR 17052, 4-4-95); and,
    Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the 
examiner's reports, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and 
Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the application 
is in the public interest;
    Now, therefore, the Board hereby authorizes the establishment of a 
subzone (Subzone 93E) at the plant of Custom Manufacturing Services, 
Lucent Technologies Inc., in Whitsett, North Carolina, at the location 
described in the application, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's 
regulations, including Sec. 400.28.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of April 1996.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

    Attest:
John J. Da Ponte, Jr.,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-11937 Filed 5-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P