alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 9, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 35990]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17361]


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


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
9 CFR Parts 304, 308, and 381

[Docket No. 95-032E]
RIN 0583-AB93


Elimination of Prior Approval Requirements for Establishment 
Drawings and Specifications, Equipment, and Certain Partial Quality 
Control Programs--Reopening of Comment Period

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Reopening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is extending the 
comment period for the proposed rule, ``Elimination of Prior Approval 
Requirements for Establishment Drawings and Specifications, Equipment, 
and Certain Partial Quality Control Programs'' (61 FR 19578, May 2, 
1996) for 60 days.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 9, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit one original and two copies of written comments to: 
FSIS Docket Clerk, DOCKET #95-032P, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 
Food Safety and Inspection Service, Room 4352, 1400 Independence Ave., 
SW, Washington, DC 20250-3700.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia F. Stolfa, Associate Deputy 
Administrator, Science and Technology; (202) 205-0699.

    Done in Washington, DC, July 2, 1996.
Michael R. Taylor,
Acting Under Secretary for Food Safety.
[FR Doc. 96-17361 Filed 7-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P
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 Pervasive Software Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John E. Farr, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Randall G. Jonkers, Chief Financial 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 the best of our knowledge:



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



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



|                        |  |  |  |                                      
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|                        |  | 
|Date: September 8, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ John E. Farr                     
|                        |  |  |  | John E. Farr                         
|                        |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  | 
|Date: September 8, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Randall G. Jonkers               
|                        |  |  |  | Randall G. Jonkers                   
|                        |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer              



This certification accompanies this
Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically
incorporates it by reference.
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Gerard R. ROBINSON, Appellant.

No. 63333.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.

Feb. 8, 1994.

Alfred A. Speer, Clayton, for appellant.

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

Before GARY M. GAERTNER, C.J., and PUDLOWSKI and SIMON, JJ.

*ORDER*

Appellant, Gerard R. Robinson, appeals from a jury conviction of one count of unlawful use of a weapon in violation of RSMo § 571.030.1(1) (1986), entered in the Circuit Court of St. Charles County for which appellant was sentenced as a prior offender to five years’ imprisonment. We affirm. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the findings and conclusions of the circuit court are not clearly erroneous. As we further find an extended opinion would have no precedential value, we affirm the circuit court’s order pursuant to Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b). A memorandum solely for the use of the parties here involved *923has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
 

SOUTHERN DIVISION
 

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 

OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:09-cv-l0424 

v. HON. PATRICK J. DUGGAN 

JANIS L. JAGIELKY, BRIAN D. ORR, 

and JESSICA ORR, 

Magistrate Judge: Donald A. Scheer 

Defendants. 

J. Michael Smith (P24530) 

D. Andrew Portinga (P55804) 

Miller Johnson 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

250 Monroe, N.W., Suite 800 

P.O. Box 306 

Grand Rapids, MI 45901-0306 

(616) 831-1700 

smithjm@millerjohnson.com 

portingaa@milleIjohnson.com 

Robert B. June (P51149) 

Law Offices ofRobert B. June PC 

Attorneys for Janis L. Jagielky 

124 Pearl Street, Suite 201 

Ypsilanti, MI 48197 

(734) 481-1000 

bobjune@junelaw.com 

DEFAULT JUDGMENT
 

AGAINST BRIAN D. ORR
 

Based on Plaintiff Unum Life Insurance Company of America's Motion for Entry 

ofDefault Judgment and good cause appearing therefore, it is Ordered and Adjudged that: 

1. Judgment is entered by default against Brian D. Orr, extinguishing all 

claims of Brian D. Orr to insurance benefits payable under the Unum Life 

Insurance Company of America Policy No. GSR 19637 based upon the death of 

James K. Orr. 

Dated: Se pt. 10 , By s/Patrick J. Duggan ,2009 

HON. PATRICKJ. DUGGAN 

GR_DOCS 1487893vl 

2:09-cv-10424-PJD-DAS Doc # 25 Filed 09/10/09 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 114
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 962 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 962

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     December 10, 2009.
    Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a two-thirds 
vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is 
presented to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported on the 
legislative day of December 10, 2009, providing for further consideration or 
disposition of the bill (H.R. 4173) to provide for financial regulatory reform, 
to protect consumers and investors, to enhance Federal understanding of 
insurance issues, to regulate the over-the-counter derivatives markets, and for 
other purposes.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### Kristin OBERHELLMANN, Respondent, v. Elmer OBERHELLMANN, Appellant.

No. 67459.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Nov. 28, 1995.

Richard E. Schwartz, James E. Parrot, St. Louis, for appellant.

Catalina Margarita Alvarez, Clayton, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., KAROHL, J., and RONNIE L. WHITE, Senior Judge.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Elmer C. Oberhellmann appeals from orders pendente lite and the denial of his motion to extend the time for discovery in this dissolution of marriage action. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by an extended written opinion. The parties have been furnished, for their information only, a memorandum opinion setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 21

Power-One, Inc.List of Subsidiaries

|NAMED ENTITY                                             |  | JURISDICTION/COUNTRY
|-------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------
| Power-One Energy Solutions Pty Ltd.                    |  | Australia           
| Power-One BVBA                                         |  | Belgium             
| Power-One Limited                                      |  | Cayman Islands      
| Power-One Co. Ltd.                                     |  | China               
| Power-One Asia Pacific Electronics (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. |  | China               
| Power-One I/S                                          |  | Denmark             
| Power-One Denmark ApS                                  |  | Denmark             
| Power-One OY                                           |  | Finland             
| Power-One S.A.S.                                       |  | France              
| Power-One GmbH                                         |  | Germany             
| Power-One Limited                                      |  | United Kingdom      
| Power-One Ltd.                                         |  | Hong Kong           
| Power-One Hungary Holdings, Kft.                       |  | Hungary             
| Power-One Ireland Ltd.                                 |  | Ireland             
| Power-One Holdings S.p.A.                              |  | Italy               
| Power-One S.p.A.                                       |  | Italy               
| Power-One Energy Solutions SDN BHD                     |  | Malaysia            
| Power-One B.V.                                         |  | Netherlands         
| Power-One Norge AS                                     |  | Norway              
| Power-One AS                                           |  | Norway              
| Power-One Limited Liability Company                    |  | Russia              
| Power-One Pte. Ltd.                                    |  | Singapore           
| Power-One s.r.o.                                       |  | Slovakia            
| Power-One Power Solutions AB                           |  | Sweden              
| Power-One AG                                           |  | Switzerland         
| HC Power, Inc.                                         |  | USA                 
| P-O Delaware, Inc.                                     |  | USA                 
| P-O Nevada Corp.                                       |  | USA                 
| PAI Capital LLC                                        |  | USA                 

---



QuickLinks
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

TOMMY HALL,

Plaintiff, Case Number 09-10933

Honorable David M. Lawson

v. Magistrate Judge Mark A. Randon

RAJA, JANY SHARPLEY, RAWAL,

CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, INC.,

and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.

Defendants.

___________________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS,

GRANTING DEFENDANT RAJA’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,

DENYING DEFENDANTS RAJA AND PRISON HEALTH SERVICES’ MOTION TO

DISMISS, AND DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT RAJA ONLY

Presently before the Court are two reports issued on July 5, 2012 by Magistrate Judge Mark

A. Randon pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The first recommends that this Court grant defendant

Raja’s motion for summary judgment; the second recommends that this Court deny defendants Raja

and Prison Health Services, Inc.’s motion to dismiss. Although the magistrate judge’s report

explicitly stated that the parties to this action may object to and seek review of the recommendation

within fourteen days of service of the report, no objections have been filed thus far. The parties’

failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith

v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure

to object to the magistrate judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently review

the matter. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). However, the Court agrees with the findings

and conclusions of the magistrate judge.

2:09-cv-10933-DML-MAR Doc # 156 Filed 07/27/12 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 2358
-2-

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendations [dkt.

#153, 154] are ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Raja’s motion for summary judgment [dkt. #132] is

GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that defendants Raja and Prison Health Services, Inc.’s motion to

dismiss [dkt. #112] is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED with respect to

defendant Raja only.

s/David M. Lawson 

DAVID M. LAWSON

United States District Judge

Dated: July 27, 2012

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on July 27, 2012.

s/Deborah R. Tofil 

DEBORAH R. TOFIL

2:09-cv-10933-DML-MAR Doc # 156 Filed 07/27/12 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 2359
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.3

                                    Exhibit I

                  Management's Assertion Concerning Compliance
                      with USAP Minimum Servicing Standards


March 29, 2002


As of and for the year ended December 31, 2001, The CIT Group/Sales Financing,
Inc. (the "Company"), a wholly owned subsidiary of CIT Group Inc., has complied
in all material respects with the minimum servicing standards set forth in the
Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for
Mortgage Bankers ("USAP").

As of and for this same period, CIT Group Inc. had in effect a financial
institution bond and computer crime policy, excess crime policy and errors and
omissions policy in the amounts of $60mm, $120mm and $25mm, respectively.




/s/ Thomas B. Hallman
------------------------------------------------
Thomas B. Hallman
President & Chief Executive Officer
The CIT Group/Sales Financing, Inc.


<PAGE>



/s/ Kenneth P. Reynolds
------------------------------------------------
Kenneth P. Reynolds
Senior Vice President, Treasurer and Controller
The CIT Group/Sales Financing, Inc.


/s/ Frank Garcia
------------------------------------------------
Frank Garcia
Senior Vice President
The CIT Group/Sales Financing, Inc.
#### CENTURY FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, LTD., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Thomas E. ROCHE, Defendant/Respondent.

No. 66121.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Six.

April 25, 1995.

*744Vincent D. Vogler, Jr. & Rebecca Hohe, Vogler & Associates, St. Louis, for appellant.

Ervin D. Davis & E. Darrell Davis, Davis *&*Schroeder, St. Charles, for respondent.

Before GRIMM, C.J., and CRANDALL and WHITE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff, Century Financial Services Group, Ltd., a corporation, brought an action against defendant, Thomas E. Roche, seeking injunctive relief, return of property, an accounting, and damages. Although the record is not clear, arguably the trial court entered a ruling denying plaintiff injunctive relief, but failed to specifically enter judgment on the remaining issues. Plaintiff appeals from that ruling.1 We dismiss the appeal.

Although neither party raises the issue of appellate jurisdiction, it is our duty to do so *sua sponte. Haugland v. Parsons,*827 S.W.2d 285, 286 (Mo.App.1992). An appellate court has jurisdiction only over final judgments. *Id.*In the absence of a specific designation in conformity with language of Rule 74.01(b), a judgment is final and appeal-able only when it disposes of all the issues for all parties and leaves nothing for future determination. *O’Neill v. O’Neill,*864 S.W.2d 7, 8 (Mo.App.E.D.1993).

Here, the trial court’s ruling did not dispose of all issues. Thus the trial court’s ruling is not a final judgment and we are without jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

1

. The petition seeking a *permanent*injunction is not in the legal file. Although the trial court entered an order consolidating the hearing on the preliminary injunction with that of the permanent injunction, the specific ruling only denied plaintiff's petition and motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
#### A.R. LANDMARK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Appellant/Respondent, v. HS2D INVESTORS, LTD., d/b/a Waterway Gas, Respondent/Appellant.

Nos. WD 50258, WD 50338.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Dec. 19, 1995.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Jan. 30, 1996.

Application to Transfer Denied March 26, 1996.

Ken R. Battis, Fairway, Kan., and Stephen Jay Dennis, Westwood, Kan., for appellant.

Stanley E. Goldstein, Clayton, for respondent.

Before LAURA DENVIR STITH, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and HANNA, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The jury returned a verdict in favor of appellant, A.R. Landmark Construction Company, Inc., for $100,000. A.R. Landmark Construction Company, Inc. appeals the denial of its motion for prejudgment in*805terest. Defendant, HS2D Investors, Ltd., d/b/a Waterway Gas, maintains in its cross-appeal that the verdict was so grossly excessive as to indicate bias and prejudice. No precedential value would be served by a published opinion. A memorandum setting forth the reasons for the court’s decision has been provided the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

KENNETH MYERS,

Plaintiff, No. 08-CV-15203-DT

vs. Hon. Gerald E. Rosen

MICHIGAN DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS

PAROLE BOARD,

Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

At a session of said Court, held in the

 U.S. Courthouse, Detroit, Michigan

 on August 31, 2009 

 PRESENT: Honorable Gerald E. Rosen

 United States District Judge

This matter having come before the Court on the July 27, 2009 Report and

Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen recommending that

the Court grant Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment, and dismiss

Plaintiff’s Complaint in its entirety, with prejudice; and no timely objections to the

Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation having been filed; and the Court having

reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and the Court’s file of this

action and having concluded that, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation,

Defendant’s Motion should be granted and this case should, accordingly, be dismissed in its

2:08-cv-15203-GER-RSW Doc # 14 Filed 08/31/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 161
entirety, as recommended by the Magistrate Judge; and the Court being otherwise fully

advised in the premises,

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report

and Recommendation of July 27, 2009 [Dkt. # 13] be, and hereby is, adopted by this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s

Report and Recommendation, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment

[Dkt. # 9] be, and hereby is, GRANTED. Plaintiff’s Complaint is, accordingly,

DISMISSED, in its entirety, with prejudice.

s/Gerald E. Rosen 

Chief Judge, United States District Court

Dated: August 31, 2009

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on August 31, 2009 , I electronically filed the foregoing paper with the

Clerk of the Court using the ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following:

 Charles C. Schettler, Jr. , and I

hereby certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the paper to the following non-ECF

participants:

 Kenneth Myers, #448364, Cooper Street Correctional Facility, 3100 Cooper Street, Jackson,

Michigan 49201 .

s/Ruth A. Brissaud 

Ruth A. Brissaud, Case Manager

(313) 234-5137

2:08-cv-15203-GER-RSW Doc # 14 Filed 08/31/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 162
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 131 (Monday, July 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 35710]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17271]


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


COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED

Procurement List; Proposed Addition

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled.

ACTION: Proposed Addition to Procurement List.

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

SUMMARY: The Committee has received proposal to add to the Procurement 
List a service to be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons 
who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED ON OR BEFORE: August 7, 1996.

ADDRESS: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled, Crystal Square 3, Suite 403, 1735 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Arlington, Virginia 22202-3461.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Milkman (703) 603-7740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published pursuant to 41 
U.S.C. 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested 
persons an opportunity to submit comments on the possible impact of the 
proposed action.
    If the Committee approves the proposed addition, all entities of 
the Federal Government (except as otherwise indicated) will be required 
to procure the service listed below from nonprofit agencies employing 
persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.
    I certify that the following action will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors 
considered for this certification were:
    1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, 
recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other 
than the small organizations that will furnish the service to the 
Government.
    2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish 
the service to the Government.
    3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would 
accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-
48c) in connection with the service proposed for addition to the 
Procurement List.
    Comments on this certification are invited. Commenters should 
identify the statement(s) underlying the certification on which they 
are providing additional information.
    The following service has been proposed for addition to Procurement 
List for production by the nonprofit agency listed: Food Service 
Attendant, U.S. Coast Guard, Haley Hall Dining Facility, Building 560, 
Petaluma, California, NPA: North Bay Rehabilitation Services, Inc., San 
Rafael, California at its facility in Rohnert Park, California.
Beverly L. Milkman,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 96-17271 Filed 7-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND  PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906  OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

We, Richard J. Thompson, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Linda C. Heller, Senior Vice President, Finance, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer of Power-One, Inc. (the "Company"), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Rule 13a-14(b) or
Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our
knowledge:



Date: March 16, 2010/s/ RICHARD J. THOMPSON Richard J. Thompson President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ LINDA C. HELLER Linda C. Heller Senior Vice President, Finance, Treasurer
and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)


---



QuickLinks