alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shawn Leigh JONES, a/k/a Shawn Lee Jones, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-6113.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 22, 2003.

Decided Aug. 11, 2003.

*238Shawn Leigh Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Janet S. Reincke, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Shawn Leigh Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(2000). A certificate of appeal-ability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1040, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), *cert denied,*534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jones has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid in the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
exv4w9w3






Exhibit 4.9.3




CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

PURSUANT TO SECTION 3807(e) OF THE DELAWARE STATUTORY TRUST ACT

(12 Del. C. § 3801 et seq.)




          THIS Certificate of Amendment is being duly executed and filed on behalf of each Delaware
statutory trust (collectively, the “Trusts”) for which The Bank of New York (Delaware) acts as
trustee, by the undersigned, as trustee, to amend the respective Certificates of Trust of the
Trusts pursuant to Section 3807(e) of the Delaware Statutory Trust Act (12 Del. C. § 3801
et seq.) (the “Act”).




          1. Amendment of Certificates of Trust. The Certificate of Trust of each of the Trusts
is hereby amended by changing the name of the trustee of the Trusts in the State of Delaware from
The Bank of New York (Delaware) to BNYM (Delaware).




          2. Effective Date. This Certificate of Amendment shall be effective upon filing with
the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware.




          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate as of January 15, 2008,
in accordance with Section 3807(e) of the Act.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	BNYM (DELAWARE), formerly known as The Bank of
New York (Delaware), not in its individual
capacity but solely as trustee	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Vincent E. Sampson	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Name:
	 	Vincent E. Sampson	 	 
	 

	 	Title:
	 	President
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 

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Jeremy Pinson, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Unknown Ivey, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-18-00152-TUC-DCB 

ORDER 

 This matter was stayed due to the Federal Government shutdown. On February 4, 

2019, the Defendants filed a Notice of Resumed Government Activity. (Doc. 24.) 

Defendants filed a proposed deadline to file the Answer by April 5, 2019 by which time 

counsel will be representing all Defendants. (Notice (Doc. 28)). Plaintiff filed a Motion 

for Order to Show Cause why the Defendants should not be sanctioned for fraud because 

the Notice reflected his electronic signature suggesting he had no objection to the proposed 

April 5, 2019 date. The Defendants explain the electronically attached signature was an 

oversight because they were filing numerous Notices in all the cases that had been stayed 

during the shutdown. (Doc. 27.) The Court finds no fraud upon the Court. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Order to Show Cause (Doc. 26) is DENIED. 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 
- 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 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendants shall Answer, file a motion, or 

otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint by April 5, 2019. 

Dated this 11th day of March, 2019.
EXHIBIT 13 
E

XHIBIT 13 

ObjectionableFees 

MarkCodyTimeEntries 

Date Attorney Time Fee 

10/13/2008 Cody .33 100.00

11/26/2008 Cody .75 225.00

11/26/2008 Cody 1.00 300.00

12/2/2008 Cody .25 75.00

1/29/2009 Cody .25 75.00

3/2/2009 Cody .50 150.00

3/24/2009 Cody .25 75.00

4/23/2009 Cody 1.00 300.00

4/24/2009 Cody 1.00 300.00

5/4/2009 Cody .25 75.00

7/20/2009 Cody .25 75.00

10/8/2009 Cody 2.33 700.00

10/8/2009 Cody 5.501,650.00

10/9/2009 Cody .42 125.00

11/25/2009 Cody .33 100.00

12/3/2009 Cody 1.50 225.00

12/7/2009 Cody .50 150.00

12/7/2009 Cody .08 25.00

12/17/2009 Cody 3.00 450.00

12/17/2009 Cody 2.50 375.00

12/28/2009 Cody .50 150.00

12/28/2009 Cody 1.00 300.00

12/28/2009 Cody .75 225.00

1/4/2010 Cody 1.00 300.00

1/4/2010 Cody 1.25 375.00

GrandTotal 26

.49 $6,900.00

264297
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

Paul Felix Mason, III,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Commissioner of Social Security 

Administration,

Defendant.

No. CV-18-08016-PCT-ESW

ORDER 

Pending before the Court is Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett’s Report and 

Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint be dismissed

without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a cause of action. (Doc. 12.) 

After considering the Report and Recommendation, the Court will grant 

Magistrate Judge Willett’s recommendation.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 

recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v. 

Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have fourteen days from the 

service of a copy of the Magistrate’s recommendation within which to file specific

written objections to the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to 

object to a Magistrate Judge’s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo

review of the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings and waives all objections to those 

findings on appeal. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure 
- 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

to object to a Magistrate Judge’s conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering the 

propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal.” Id. A general objection is not a 

specific written objection, and consequently, the Court is under no obligation to review it.

See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (stating that no review at all is required for 

“any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 

F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.2003) (same).

DISCUSSION1

Plaintiff’s letter, which the Court considers an objection in form but not in 

substance, provides this Court with no guidance as to what portions of the Report and 

Recommendation Plaintiff considers to be incorrect. Consequently, Plaintiff’s letter is 

ineffective, and the Court is relieved of any obligation to review it. See Thomas, 474 U.S. 

at 149. For the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s report, the Court adopts the 

Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that this case be dismissed without prejudice based 

upon Plaintiff’s failure to state a cause of action.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 12.)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing without prejudice Plaintiff’s First 

Amended Complaint based upon Plaintiff’s failure to establish a cause of action.

Dated this 26th day of June, 2018.

Honorable Stephen M. McNamee

Senior United States District Judge

 1

The procedural history of this case is set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Report 

and Recommendation. (Doc. 12.)
#### Craig S. ADAMS, Appellant, v. Janet VANWORMER, Respondent.

No. WD 51048.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Nov. 28, 1995.

Craig S. Adams, Jefferson City, pro se.

Janet VanWormer, Kansas City, pro se.

*830Before ELLIS, P.J., and HANNA and SPINDEN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Craig S. Adams, who is incarcerated at the Missouri Department of Corrections, appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to proceed as a poor person and dismissing his petition with prejudice as a frivolous lawsuit without merit.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
```

                                             STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                      AS ENACTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the Annual Report) of SCE
Funding LLC (the "Company"), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
each of the undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her 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 (15
              U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

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

                                                              W. James Scilacci
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              W. James Scilacci
                                                              Chief Executive Officer
                                                              SCE Funding LLC

                                                              Mary C. Simpson
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Mary C. Simpson
                                                              Chief Financial Officer
                                                              SCE Funding LLC

     This statement accompanies the Annual Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to
     the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
     Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SCE Funding LLC and will be retained by
     SCE Funding LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```
SCWC-11-0000016

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

 

STATE OF HAWAI#I,

Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

MICHAEL C. TIERNEY, 

also known as, Michael C. King, 

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.

 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(ICA NO. CAAP-11-0000016; CR. NOS. 88-2209 and 89-0024)

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Michael C. Tierney’s 

Application for Writ of Certiorari filed on September 26, 2011,

is hereby rejected.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, October 19, 2011.

Michael C. Tierney,

Pro Se Petitioner/

Defendant-Appellant

on the application

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. 

/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-11-0000016

19-OCT-2011

08:39 AM
**Exhibit 10.32**

 

**Don Morrison**

 

Pursuant to the terms of his employment as of March 9, 2004, Mr. Morrison receives an annual base salary of $260,000. Mr. Morrison is eligible for an annual bonus of upto sixty percent (60%) of his base salary based upon Company performance goals. Mr. Morrison is eligible for Stock Awards under the Company’s Equity Incentive Plans and may participate in the Company’s Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Mr.Morrison and the Company have entered into a Change in Control Agreement as well as the Company’s Form Indemnification agreement. Mr. Morrison is entitled to reimbursement for a Company paid life insurance policy with a face value amount of$1,500,000. Mr. Morrison is also entitled to reimbursement for tax preparation services in the amount of up to $1,000 per annum. Further, Mr. Morrison is eligible for Company health benefits and may participate in the Company 401K plan offered toall employees.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. C E S ARC OR R E A- C OR R E A, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 10- 10226 D . C . N o . 4 : 0 9 - c r - 0 1 6 2 6 - J MR ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona J ohn M . R ol l , C hi e f

J udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r25, 2011 ** B efo re: T R O T T , G O U L D , an dR A W L IN S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C es arC orre a- C orre a app ea l s f rom the l ow -e nd 41 -m on th sent ence i m po se d f o llo w in g h is g u ilty - p le ac o n v ic tio n f o rille g a l r e e n try , in v io la tio n o f 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 2 6 . W e d is m is s . 

# FI LED NO V 03 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 10226 2 C orre a- C orre a c on t ends thatthe di stri ctcourterre d i n app l yi ng the 16 -l evel “c r im e o f

v io le n c e ” e n h a n c e m e n t u n d e rU .S .S .G . § 2 L 1 .2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( ii) b e c au s e it co n d u ct eda m o d i fi edcat eg o ri cal an al ysi s o f th e rel ev an tst at e st atu t e w i th o u tfi rst det erm i ni ng thatthe st atut e i s broaderthan i t s f eder al coun t erpart . W e are prec l ud ed fr om re ac hi ng the m er i t s of C orre a- C orre a’ s c l ai m by a val i d app ea l w a iv e r . See U

ni ted States v. N

un ez , 2 2 3 F .3 d9 5 6 , 9 5 8 - 5 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) ; see a l so U n ite d S ta tes v . J

a c o b o Ca s tillo , 49 6 F . 3d 94 7, 95 7 (9th C i r. 20 07 ) ( en banc). DI S MI S S E D.
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

NICOLE M. ARGENTIERI

Acting Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice

AUSTIN M. BERRY (Texas Bar No. 24062615, austin.berry2@usdoj.gov) U.S. Department of Justice

Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section

1301 New York Avenue, NW, 11th Floor

Washington, D.C. 20005

Telephone (202) 412-4136

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Michael Lacey, et al.,

Defendants.

CR-18-422-PHX-DJH

UNITED STATES’ MOTION FOR 

LEAVE FOR TRIAL ATTORNEY 

AUSTIN M. BERRY TO APPEAR BY 

PHONE

Date: September 5, 2023 Time: 10:30 A.M. 

Location: Special Proceedings 

Courtroom

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1751 Filed 09/03/23 Page 1 of 2
- 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

Undersigned counsel for the United States, Austin M. Berry, hereby moves for 

permission to appear by phone at the September 5, 2023 status conference currently 

scheduled for 10:30AM. Trial Attorney Austin M. Berry will not yet have arrived back in 

Phoenix in time for a hearing on September 5th. Other counsel for the United States will be 

present in the courtroom for this hearing. 

Respectfully submitted this 3rd day of September, 2023.

NICOLE M. ARGENTIERI

Acting Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice

s/Austin M. Berry AUSTIN M. BERRY

Trial Attorney

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 3, 2023, I electronically transmitted the attached 

document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a 

Notice of Electronic Filing to the CM/ECF registrants who have entered their appearance 

as counsel of record.

s/ Austin M. Berry Austin M. Berry

Trial Attorney

Child Exploitation & Obscenity Section

Department of Justice

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1751 Filed 09/03/23 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit
        No. 32.1**
  CERTIFICATION
  Pursuant
        to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
        Act
        of 2002, the undersigned officer of BoomJ, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies
        based on his knowledge that:
 
 (i)  the
        accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period
        ended
        March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
        date
        hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
        amended; and
 
 (ii)  the
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and
        for
        the periods covered in the Report.
 May
                    15, 2008
                /s/
                    Robert J. McNultyRobert
                    J. McNulty, Principal Executive OfficerMay
                    15, 2008
                /s/
                    Mark V NoffkeMark
                    V. Noffke, Principal Financial
                    Officer
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
        Act of 2002 (Section 906), or other document authenticating, acknowledging,
        or
        otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
        electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has
        been
        provided to BoomJ, Inc. and will be retained by BoomJ, Inc. and furnished
        to the
        Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 The
        foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
        Commission as an Exhibit to the Form 10-Q and shall not be considered filed
        as
        part of the Form 10-Q.
 
 -22-
Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH   ECF No. 28   filed 11/10/09    PageID.258    Page 1 of 8

Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH   ECF No. 28   filed 11/10/09    PageID.259    Page 2 of 8

Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH   ECF No. 28   filed 11/10/09    PageID.260    Page 3 of 8

Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH   ECF No. 28   filed 11/10/09    PageID.261    Page 4 of 8

Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH   ECF No. 28   filed 11/10/09    PageID.262    Page 5 of 8

Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH   ECF No. 28   filed 11/10/09    PageID.263    Page 6 of 8

Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH   ECF No. 28   filed 11/10/09    PageID.264    Page 7 of 8

Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH   ECF No. 28   filed 11/10/09    PageID.265    Page 8 of 8
---

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

The undersigned, Mingchun Zhou, the Chief Executive Officer of
CHINA SKYRISE DIGITAL SERVICE INC. (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended September 30, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this
statement this 22nd day of November, 2010.

/s/ Mingchun
ZhouMingchun Zhou Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive
Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to China Skyrise Digital Service Inc. and will be retained
by China Skyrise Digital Service Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
y 

Dockets.Justia.com
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 18, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30847-30848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15339]



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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 36 and 69

[CC Docket 96-45; DA-96-936]


Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

[[Page 30848]]

SUMMARY: The purpose of the notice is to inform the general public of a 
meeting that will be held by the Federal-State Joint Board on universal 
service.

DATES: The Federal-State Joint Board in CC Docket 96-45 will hold an 
Open Meeting on Wednesday, June 19, 1996 at 9:00 a.m.

ADDRESSES: in Room 856 at 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Flannery, Accounting and Audits 
Division, Common Carrier Bureau, at (202) 418-0844.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At the meeting, the Federal-State Joint 
Board will hear from two panels of experts addressing universal service 
issues set forth in Section 254 of the Telecommunications Act. In 
addition, the Federal-State Joint Board will consider whether to extend 
the two-year indexed cap on the rate at which the Universal Service 
Fund may grow.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-15339 Filed 6-12-96; 4:23 pm]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P