alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 122 (Monday, June 24, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32429-32430]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15964]



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

[[Page 32430]]


DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-145-004]


Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice of Compliance Filing

June 18, 1996.
    Take notice that on June 13, 1996, Northwest Pipeline Corporation 
(Northwest) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet, to become effective 
June 26, 1995:

2nd Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 231

    Northwest states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with 
the directives of the Commission's letter order in Docket No. RP95-145-
003 relating to the sale of excess gas in limited or infrequent 
situations. Northwest has restored to Section 14.12 of the General 
Terms and Conditions of its tariff certain language that was filed on 
May 26, 1995 in this docket.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 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.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-15964 Filed 6-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                SAVWATT USA, INC.
                             A Delaware Corporation
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SavWatt USA, Inc. ("Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael Haug, Chief
Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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


Dated: May 20, 2011                        /s/ Michael Haug
                                           -------------------------------------
                                      By:  Michael Haug
                                      Its: Chief Executive Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SHERMAN P. HAWKINS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

DAVID PENTLAND; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-35725

D.C. No. 6:14-cv-00069-DLC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 26, 2016** 

Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. 

Sherman P. Hawkins, a Montana state prisoner, appeals pro se from the

district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging due process

violations arising out of a disciplinary hearing. We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick

FILED

AUG 04 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Hawkins’s action because Hawkins

failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants violated his due process

rights. See Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455 (1985) (requirements of due

process are satisfied if “some evidence” supports the disciplinary decision); Wolff

v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-70 (1974) (setting forth due process requirements

for prison disciplinary hearing procedures).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Hawkins’s

complaint without leave to amend because amendment would be futile. See

Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011)

(setting forth standard of review and explaining that dismissal without leave to

amend is proper when amendment would be futile).

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Hawkins’s request for appointment of counsel, filed on May 16, 2016, is

denied. 

Hawkins’s request to file a substitute brief, filed on July 18, 2016, is denied

as unnecessary. 

AFFIRMED.

2 15-35725
<PAGE>


                                       [LOGO]

February 25, 1998
Via Facsimile & Certified Mail

Mr. Bob Arnot
I.C. Isaacs & Co., L.P.
3840 Bank Street
Baltimore, MD 21224-2522

         RE: International License Agreement for I.C. Isaacs Europe S.L.
                                   Wholesale Sales

Dear Bob:

Pursuant to our conversations, BHPC Marketing, Inc. agrees to the following:

Effective immediately for the current Contract Year in progress and 
subsequent Contract Years, this letter will confirm our agreement that in the 
event that I.C. Isaacs Europe S.L. does not achieve the Guaranteed Target Net 
Shipment, BHPC Marketing, Inc. will not terminate subject agreement.

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me.

Sincerely,

BHPC Marketing, Inc.    The foregoing is agreed to and accepted as setting for
/s/ Don Garrison        the agreement of the undersigned with respect to the 
--------------------    matters set forth above.
    Don Garrison
    Vice President

                      by: /s/ Robert Arnot                            2/27/98
                         ----------------------------------------     -------
                              Robert Arnot, Chairman of the Board     DATE
                              and Co-CEO
                              I.C. Isaacs & Co., Inc.


                      by: 
                          ---------------------------------------      --------
                              Gerald Lear, President/C.E.O.            DATE
                              I.C. Isaacs & Co., L.P.
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Cable Michigan Inc. on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-37947 and 333-38139) of our
report dated March 13, 1998, on our audits of the consolidated financial
statements and financial statement schedule of Cable Michigan Inc. and
Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and for the years ended December
31, 1997, 1996 and 1995, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form
10-K.


/s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
----------------------------
COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

2400 Eleven Penn Center
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 31, 1998
Exhibit 10.47





PROMISSORY NOTE














$                                                                                                                                                                                                              Date: December __, 2009





For value received, Sunovia Energy Technologies, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Borrower”), at 6408 Parkland Drive, Suite 104 Sarasota, Florida,  promises to pay to the order of the below specified “Lender” and address, or at such other place as the Lender may designate in writing, the sum of $_______ , in one year, on _____________, 20__ with up to 5 consecutive renewal options on the part of the Company. Company shall notify Lender of intent to renew within 5 days prior to the end of each term of the loan.








If any payment obligation under this Note is not paid when due, the Borrower promises to pay all costs of collection, including reasonable attorney fees, whether or not a lawsuit is commenced as part of the collection process. Interest shall be paid monthly at a rate of 10% annually until paid.





All payments of principle and interest on this Note shall be paid in the legal currency of the United States.  Borrower waives presentment for payment, protest, and notice of protest and nonpayment of this Note.





No renewal or extension of this Note, delay in enforcing any right of the Lender under this Note, or assignment by Lender of this Note shall affect the liability of the Borrower.





This Note shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida.








Signed this _____ day of December, 2009





BORROWER:


LENDER:Sunovia Energy Technologies, Inc.By:


By:6408 Parkland Drive, Suite 104Sarasota, Fl 34243


Street Address
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

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

v. 

James Larkin,

Defendant.

No. CR-18-00422-002-PHX-DJH

ORDER 

Before the Court is a Motion to Exonerate Bond (Doc. 1690) as to Defendant 

James Larkin. Finding good cause, and no objection having been filed, 

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion to Exonerate Bond (Doc. 1690).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to release the 

$1,000,000.00 surety bond to the surety bond poster, Margaret G. Larkin.

The Court finds there is no excludable delay.

Dated this 24th day of August, 2023.

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa

United States District Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1736 Filed 08/25/23 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with this Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 31, 2010 (the Report) of
PennantPark Investment Corporation and Subsidiaries (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Aviv Efrat, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of 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, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                
|----------------
|/s/ Aviv Efrat  
|Aviv Efrat      
|February 2, 2011
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 report of Ring Energy, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned principal executive and financial officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date:  August 12, 2011    /s/ Robert Steve Owens Robert Steve Owens, President and Treasurer (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6291
EPHRAIN RELIFORD, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLIE TRUESDALE, in his individual and official capacity, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-3665-3-17BC) Submitted: August 15, 1996 Decided: August 20, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ephrain Reliford, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, because Appellant alleges only malicious prosecution which is not cognizable until the criminal proceedings against Appellant are terminated in his favor, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Reliford v. Truesdale , No. CA-95-3665-3-17BC (D.S.C. Jan. 18, 1996). See also Brooks v. City of Winston-Salem , 85 F.3d 178, 183 (4th Cir. 1996). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 10.19



LOGO



October 27, 2003



Mr. Larry F. Williams

Chief Executive Officer

ITC^DeltaCom, Inc.

1791 O. G. Skinner Drive

West Point, GA 31833



Dear Larry:



This letter is submitted pursuant to the discussion that took place during the meeting of the Compensation Committee (the Committee) of the Board of Directors on Tuesday, August 12, 2003.



The consensus of the Committee, as you know, was that the oral agreement (the
Agreement) made between you and the company on or about July 24, 2001, pertaining to your use of the companys co-owned aircraft, at the time you were offered and accepted your current position with the company, should be documented
in writing.



It was and remains the belief of the Committee that your use of
the aircraft contributes to your security and safety and thereby benefits the Company. Confirming prior practice based on this belief and based on the Committees knowledge of the Agreement, the Committee hereby confirms that, consistent with
past practice, you, and accompanying family members, are entitled to the weekly use of the aircraft for your transportation between Lagrange, Georgia and your home in Florida or, alternatively, to the home of a family member. The Committee further
confirms that such transportation will be provided at company expense and that your compensation will be adjusted to the extent necessary to avoid any adverse tax consequence to you.



Please sign this letter below to acknowledge that this arrangement represents the Agreement made with you on or about July 24, 2001.



|                                          |  |                         |  |               |  |                         
|----------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------- |  | ------------- |  | ------------------------
|ITC^DeltaCom, Inc. Compensation Committee |  |                         |  | Acknowledged:
|                                          |  |                         | 
|By:                                       |  | /s/    Donald W. Burton |  |               |  | /s/    Larry F. Williams
|                                          |  |                         |  |               |  |                         
|                                          |  | Don Burton, Chairman    |  |               |  | Larry F. Williams
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 quarterly report of Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Michael A. Narachi President and Chief Executive 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 my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and

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

Date: August 7, 2009



/s/ Michael A. NarachiMichael A. NarachiPresident and Chief Executive Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
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

3855613.2

MOTION FOR LEAVE FOR COUNSEL TO APPEAR BY VIRTUAL TELECONFERENCE 

AT MARCH 20, 2023 HEARING

Gary S. Lincenberg (admitted pro hac vice)

 glincenberg@birdmarella.com

Ariel A. Neuman (admitted pro hac vice)

 aneuman@birdmarella.com

Gopi K. Panchapakesan (admitted pro hac vice)

 gpanchapakesan@birdmarella.com

BIRD, MARELLA, BOXER, WOLPERT, NESSIM,

DROOKS, LINCENBERG & RHOW, P.C.

1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor

Los Angeles, California 90067-2561

Telephone: (310) 201-2100

Facsimile: (310) 201-2110

Attorneys for Defendant John Brunst

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Michael Lacey, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 2:18-cr-00422-004-PHX-DJH

MOTION FOR LEAVE FOR 

COUNSEL TO APPEAR BY VIRTUAL 

TELECONFERENCE AT MARCH 20, 

2023 HEARING

[Filed concurrently with [Proposed] 

Order]

Assigned to Hon. Diane J. Humetewa, 

Courtroom 506

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1531 Filed 03/14/23 Page 1 of 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

3855613.2 2

MOTION FOR LEAVE FOR COUNSEL TO APPEAR BY VIRTUAL TELECONFERENCE 

AT MARCH 20, 2023 HEARING

Defendant John Brunst, by and through his undersigned counsel, seeks leave to 

attend the March 20, 2023 hearing regarding Defendants Larkin’s and Spear’s Motion to 

Continue Trial by virtual teleconference.

As the government has seized the majority of Mr. Brunst’s assets, he has 

insufficient funds available to cover the fees and costs for the re-trial of this case, any 

appeals, and litigation of the related consolidated civil forfeiture matter, and is seeking to 

preserve resources as much as possible. Mr. Brunst has not filed any motions in 

connection with the March 20 hearing. Mr. Brunst therefore requests that undersigned 

counsel be permitted to appear at the March 20, 2023 hearing virtually. 

The Government does not object to Mr. Brunst’s request.

DATED: March 14, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

Gary S. Lincenberg

Gopi K. Panchapakesan

Ariel A. Neuman

Bird, Marella, Boxer, Wolpert, Nessim,

Drooks, Lincenberg & Rhow, P.C.

By: /s/ Gopi K. Panchapakesan

Gopi K. Panchapakesan

Attorneys for Defendant John Brunst

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1531 Filed 03/14/23 Page 2 of 2
#### Gerald ROBERTSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 3-87-157-CR.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin.

Nov. 16, 1988.

Larry Dowling, Dowling *&*Wilson, Austin, for appellant.

Ronald Earle, Dist. Atty., Laurie Booras, Asst. Dist. Atty., Austin, for appellee.

Before SHANNON, C.J., and CARROLL and JONES, JJ.

CARROLL, Justice.

A jury found appellant guilty of unlawful use of a motor vehicle. Tex.Pen.Code Ann. § 31.07 (Supp.1988). The jury assessed punishment at imprisonment for three years. We will dismiss the cause for want of jurisdiction.

Sentence in this cause was imposed in open court on June 24, 1987, at which time appellant orally stated his intent to appeal. He did not file a motion for new trial and never filed a written notice of appeal.

In order to perfect an appeal to this Court, it was necessary for appellant to give notice of appeal in writing on or before July 24, 1987. Tex.R.App.P.Ann. 40(b)(1) (Supp.1988). Although the transcript contains a written memorandum prepared by the district clerk acknowledging appellant’s oral notice, this document does not constitute a written notice of appeal as required by Rule 40(b)(1). *Shute v. State,*744 S.W.2d 96 (Tex.Cr.App.1988).

On oral argument appellant asked this Court to waive his failure to file written notice of appeal under either Tex.R. App.P.Ann. 83 or 2 (Supp.1988). We decline. Rule 83 is inapplicable when a defendant fails to file written notice of appeal. *Johnson v. State,*747 S.W.2d 568 (Tex.App.1988, no pet.). Furthermore, under the facts of this case, we decline to suspend the notice requirements under Rule 2.

We dismiss the cause for want of jurisdiction.
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 974 

Urging the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to reevaluate the endangerment and cause or contribute findings regarding greenhouse gases signed on December 7, 2009. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 15, 2009 

Mr. ALEXANDER submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Urging the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency to reevaluate the endangerment and cause or 

contribute findings regarding greenhouse gases signed 

on December 7, 2009. 

Whereas the Environmental Protection Agency found that 6 

naturally occurring gases contained in Earth’s atmosphere, including carbon dioxide and methane, threaten 

the public health and welfare; 

Whereas the Environmental Protection Agency, under the 

banner of clean air laws originally drafted over 30 years 

ago, stretching its authority by using such laws as a 

scare tactic, found that action must be taken to reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions; and 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 974 IH 

Whereas the impacts of climate change and proposed resolutions, tainted by the recent uncovering of climategate, are 

not universally accepted: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) finds the endangerment and cause or con3 tribute findings for greenhouse gases signed by the 

4 Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

5 Agency, under the pretense of the Supreme Court 

6 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA (549 U.S. 497 

7 (2007)), unacceptable; 

8 (2) disapproves of the actions of the Adminis9 trator of the Environmental Protection Agency in 

10 casting aside the legislative process and signing such 

11 controversial and potentially unfounded endanger12 ment and cause or contribute findings; and 

13 (3) urges the Administrator of the Environ14 mental Protection Agency to reevaluate the 

15 endangerment and cause or contribute findings 

16 signed on December 7, 2009. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS