alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 2482-078]

An environmental assessment (EA) is available for public review. The EA was prepared for an application filed by Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P on April 21, 2008, requesting the Commission's authorization to permit the Saratoga County Water Authority (SCWA) to withdraw water at a rate of 14 million gallons per day from the Sherman Island reservoir for municipal use.

The EA evaluates the environmental impacts that would result from permitting the SCWA to withdraw water from the Sherman Island reservoir. The proposal would include the construction of a screened intake facility placed on the bottom of the reservoir and a section of buried pipe that would extend to a pumping station located outside the project boundary. The EA finds that approval of the application would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

                    A copy of the EA is attached to a Commission order titled “Order Approving Non-Project Use of Lands and Waters”, issued July 30, 2008 and is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room, or it may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at                     *http://www.ferc.gov*                     using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number “P-2482” in the docket field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-(866)-208-3372 or (202) 502-8659 (for TTY).                

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

 [FR Doc. E8-18059 Filed 8-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
<PAGE>
                                                             EXHIBIT 23.2


                               RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                               PETROLEUM ENGINEERS
1100 LOUISIANA  SUITE 3800  HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002-5218  TELEPHONE (713)651-9191

                                                           


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS


         As independent petroleum engineers, we hereby consent to (a) the use of
our name and  references to our Firm in this  Amendment to Annual Report on Form
10-K of 3DX  Technologies  Inc. for the year ended  December 31, 1997 and (b) to
the inclusion of the estimate of proved reserves and present value of the future
net  revenues  included  in our report  dated  February  9, 1998 in such  Annual
Report.  We further consent to the incorporation by reference of the information
set forth above which is  included in such Annual  Report into the  Registration
Statement on Form S-8, filed June 27, 1997,  (No.  333-30187)  pertaining to the
stock option plan of 3DX Technologies, Inc.

                                                     /s/ Ryder Scott Company
                                                         Petroleum Engineers

                                                     RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                                     PETROLEUM ENGINEERS


Houston, Texas
November 2, 1998
**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 Largo Vista Group, Ltd (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned, Denise
      Deng,
      Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of her knowledge,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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:
      April 13, 2007





/s/
      Denise Deng


Denise
      Deng, Chief Financial Officer





This
      certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended.
#### Ralph O’SHEA, Employee/Appellant, v. ANHEUSER BUSCH, INC., Employer/Respondent, and Treasurer of Missouri as Custodian of Second Injury Fund, Additional Party/Respondent.

No. 69350.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Oct. 22, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Dec. 17,1996.

Application to Transfer Denied Jan. 21,1997.

*703Harry J. Nichols, St. Louis, for employee/appellant.

E. Thomas Liese, St. Louis, for employer/respondent.

Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Claimant appeals the denial of his claim for permanent partial disability by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission). We affirm. The findings of the Commission are supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record, and an extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 32.1

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

Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
the undersigned officer of Team Nation Holdings Corporation (the Company)
hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

(i)
the accompanying report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter
ended September 30, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 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: November 12,
  2009 | By: | /s/ Dennis R.
  Duffy    
|                          |     |                          
|                          |     | Dennis R. Duffy          
|                          |     | Chief Executive
  Officer

This certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission.

---
#### Abraham Feinstein, Appellant, v. Otto E. Reimer and Jacob Hyman, Respondents.

Motion granted, with costs, unless the appellant perfect his appeal within ten days, in which case the motion is denied, without costs. Present — Hirschberg, P. J., Jenks, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, JJ.
#### Frank CUSHMAN, Employee/Respondent, v. AMERICAN NATIONAL CAN COMPANY, Employer/Appellant, and National Union Fire Insurance Company, c/o Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc., Insurer/Appellant.

No. 69299.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

July 9, 1996.

Robert M. Evans, Mary Anne Linsdey, Evans & Dixon, St. Louis, for appellant.

Harry J. Nichols, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before GERALD M. SMITH, P.J., and GARY GAERTNER and RHODES RUSSELL, JJ.

*MEMORANDUM DECISION*

PER CURIAM.

Employer appeals from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s award to employee for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome resulting from injuries arising from his employment. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The parties have been furnished with a statement of the reasons for the Court’s decision. The Commission’s award is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

Case Number 09-20457-BC

Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

 v.

LORENZO HUGHES,

Defendant.

_______________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, ACCEPTING

DEFENDANT’S PLEA OF GUILTY AS TO COUNT ONE, AND TAKING THE RULE 11

PLEA AGREEMENT UNDER ADVISEMENT

A plea hearing was conducted on October 13, 2009, by United States Magistrate Judge

Charles E. Binder pursuant to the defendant’s consent. The magistrate judge issued his report on

October 14, 2009, recommending that this Court accept the defendant’s plea of guilty. As of today’s

date, no party has filed any objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The

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

and conclusions of the magistrate judge.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [Dkt

# 20] is ADOPTED.

1:09-cr-20457-TLL-CEB Doc # 22 Filed 10/27/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 48
-2-

It is further ORDERED that the defendant’s plea of guilty as to count one is ACCEPTED,

and the Rule 11 Plea Agreement [Dkt. # 19] is taken UNDER ADVISEMENT.

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: October 27, 2009

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 October 27, 2009.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS

1:09-cr-20457-TLL-CEB Doc # 22 Filed 10/27/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 49
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 96-20244 Conference Calendar

__________________
CURTIS MACK LEWIS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JAMES A. COLLINS; M. BRUCE THALER, Warden; JERRY G. BRISHER; JOHN DOE, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. CA-H-95-CV-3276

- - - - - - - - - - June 25, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Curtis Mack Lewis, #646507, appeals the dismissal of his civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Lewis contends that the district court erred in concluding that he had not alleged that he was deprived of adequate medical care in violation of the Eighth Amendment.No. 96-20244 -2- Even if we liberally construe Lewis' complaint as alleging an Eighth Amendment violation, the claim lacks merit. Lewis' Eighth Amendment claim against the defendants in their official capacities is barred by the Eleventh Amendment. See Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman , 465 U.S. 89, 98-101 (1984). Further, Lewis' claim against the defendants in their individual capacities is equally unavailing because Lewis does not allege personal involvement or a causal connection between their actions and the alleged violation. See Thompkins v. Belt , 828 F.2d 298, 303-04 (5th Cir. 1987). Lewis does not address on appeal his claim against the correctional officers concerning the injury to his arm, and it is deemed abandoned. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action as frivolous.
See Denton v. Hernandez , 504 U.S. 25, 31-33 (1992); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). The appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous.
See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We previously warned Lewis in Lewis v. Collins , No. 95-20899 (5th Cir. Feb. 27, 1996), that further frivolous appeals would invite the imposition of sanctions and cautioned him to review any pending appeals to ensure that they did not raise frivolous arguments. Lewis has not heeded this warning.No. 96-20244 -3- Accordingly, Lewis is barred from filing any pro se , in forma pauperis , civil appeal in this court, or any pro se , in forma pauperis , initial civil pleading in any court which is subject to this court's jurisdiction, without the advance written permission of a judge of the forum court; the clerk of this court and the clerks of all federal district courts in this Circuit are directed to return to Lewis, unfiled, any attempted submission inconsistent with this bar.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION IMPOSED.
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 Skyview Development Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of the undersigned's
knowledge, 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: November 1, 2007                    By: /s/ Donald R. McKelvey
       ----------------                        -----------------------------
                                               Donald R. McKelvey, President
                                               (Principal Executive Officer)


Dated: November 1, 2007                    By: /s/ Donald R. McKelvey
       ----------------                        -----------------------------
                                               Donald R. McKelvey
                                               Principal Financial Officer
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

________________________

No. ACM S32676

________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Xhyjhaet T. MARSHALL

Airman First Class (E-3), U.S. Air Force, Appellant

________________________

Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary

Decided 13 December 2021

________________________

Military Judge: Brett A. Landry.

Sentence: Sentence adjudged on 10 November 2020 by SpCM convened at 

Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada. Sentence entered by military judge on 11 

December 2020: Bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 12 months, reduction 

to E-1, and a reprimand. 

For Appellant: Captain Ryan S. Crnkovich, USAF. 

For Appellee: Lieutenant Colonel Matthew J. Neil, USAF; Major John P. 

Patera, USAF; Mary Ellen Payne, Esquire.

Before LEWIS, ANNEXSTAD, and OWEN, Appellate Military Judges.

________________________

This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as 

precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 30.4.

________________________

PER CURIAM: 

The findings and sentence as entered are correct in law and fact, and no 

error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. Articles

59(a) and 66(d), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(d).
United States v. Marshall, No. ACM S32676

2

Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2019 ed.). Accordingly, the findings 

and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT

CAROL K. JOYCE

Clerk of the Court
Exhibit 32.2





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 Acquired Sales Corp. a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) I, Gerard M. Jacobs, Chief Financial Officer (Principal
Financial Officer) hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:





c.
The 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 or 78o(d)); and





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








/s/ Gerard M. Jacobs


Gerard M. Jacobs, Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial Officer)





Dated August 14, 2009
#### John L. MATHEIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 52190.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 16, 1996.

Irene Karns, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before EDWIN H. SMITH, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and ELLIS, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeals from order denying Rule 24.035 motion on his convictions for one count of sodomy, § 566.060, RSMo. Supp.1993; and one count of sexual abuse in the first degree, § 566.100, RSMo. Supp.1993.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 4.1 


   





 Alaia Capital, LLC 


 10 Corbin Drive 


 Darien, Connecticut 06820 


   


 February 7, 2020 


   


 m+ Buffered Fund, m+ funds Trust, Series 1-9 


 c/o The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee 


 2 Hanson Place, 12th Floor 


 Brooklyn, New York 11217 


   


		 Re: 	 m+ funds Trust, Series 1-9 (the “Trust”) 



   


   


 Ladies and Gentlemen: 


   


 We have examined Amendment No. 2 to
the Registration Statement (File No. 333-235758) for the above captioned Trust. We hereby consent to the use in the Registration
Statement of the references to Alaia Capital, LLC as evaluator. 


   


 You are hereby authorized to file a
copy of this letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission. 


   


   










	   	 Very
    truly yours, 	   
	   	   	   
	   	 Alaia
    Capital, LLC 	   
	   	   	   
	   	 By: 	 /s/
    Oscar Loynaz 	   	   
	   	   	 Name:
    Oscar Loynaz 	   
	   	   	 Title:  Managing
    Director
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To
the Board of Directors and Shareholders of FEI Company
Hillsboro, Oregon

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-110264, 333-44954, 333-92629, 333-92631,
333-57331, 333-32911, 333-08863 and 333-115840 on Forms S-8 of our reports dated March 10, 2005 on the financial statements of FEI
Company (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 146,
"Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities," effective January 1, 2003), and on management's report on the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of FEI Company for the year ended December 31, 2004.

DELOITTE &
TOUCHE LLP
Portland, Oregon
March 10, 2005

---



QuickLinks
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23



                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
                        -------------------------------



The Board of Directors
Samsonite Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 333-05467, 333-19281, 333-20775, 333-28663, 333-52185, 333-53935 and 333-
57014) on Form S-8 of Samsonite Corporation of our report dated March 16, 2001,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Samsonite Corporation and
subsidiaries as of January 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity (deficit) and comprehensive loss,
and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended January 31,
2001, and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears in the
January 31, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K of Samsonite Corporation.



                                                        KPMG LLP

Denver, Colorado
April 20, 2001
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

PULTE HOMES, INC.,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 09-13638

vs. Hon. Lawrence P. Zatkoff

LABORERS’ INTERNATIONAL UNION 

OF NORTH AMERICA, TERENCE M. 

O’SULLIVAN, and RANDY MAYHEW,

Defendants. 

_____________________________/

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S STATE LAW CLAIMS

Plaintiff filed its amended complaint on December 12, 2009, alleging federal subject-matter

jurisdiction on the basis of a federal question. On May 12, 2010, the Court granted Defendants’

motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s amended complaint. On August 2, 2011, the Sixth Circuit Court of

Appeals reversed in part and affirmed in part the Court’s dismissal of Plaintiff’s amended complaint,

with instructions to determine whether the Court may exercise jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state-law

claims. Plaintiff’s amended complaint alleges the following counts:

Count I Violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030 et seq.

Count II Violations of Nevada’s Computer Criminal Laws

Count III Trespass to Chattels

Count IV Tortious Interference with Business Relationships and Expectancies 

Count V Civil Conspiracy 

Federal district courts have original subject-matter jurisdiction over cases arising under

federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Thus, the Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over Count I because

it arises under federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Counts II–V, however, are based on state law.

2:09-cv-13638-LPZ-MAR Doc # 46 Filed 09/28/11 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 494
2

Although the Court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1367(a), the Court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction if there are

“compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction.” Id. § 1367(c)(4). The Court declines to exercise

supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state-law claims in this matter. The Court finds that

Plaintiff’s state-law claims raise novel and complex issues of state law that would be more

appropriately adjudicated in state court. See id. § 1367(c)(1). Additionally, the contemporaneous

presentation of Plaintiff’s parallel state claims for relief will result in the undue confusion of the

jury. See id. § 1367(c)(4); see also Padilla v. City of Saginaw, 867 F. Supp. 1309, 1315 (E.D. Mich.

1994). 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s state-law claims (Counts II–V) are hereby

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Lawrence P. Zatkoff 

LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: September 28, 2011

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this Order was served upon the attorneys of

record by electronic or U.S. mail on September 28, 2011.

s/Marie E. Verlinde 

Case Manager

(810) 984-3290

2:09-cv-13638-LPZ-MAR Doc # 46 Filed 09/28/11 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 495