alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 154 (Friday, August 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46258-46259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18264]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER08-1300-000]


Story Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based 
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

August 1, 2008.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Story Wind, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an 
accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application includes a 
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket

[[Page 46259]]

authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities 
and assumptions of liability, is August 21, 2008.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the
    Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list.
    They are also available for review in the Commission's Public 
Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the 
Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a 
document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any 
FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b6f0f3e4f5f9d8dadfd8d3e5c3c6c6d9c4c2f6d0d3c4d598d1d9c0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3c7a796e7f7352505552596f494c4c534e487c5a594e5f125b534a">[email protected]</span></a> or call 
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-18264 Filed 8-7-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Johnny E. SMITH, Appellant.

No. 70125.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Feb. 18, 1997.

David L. Simpson, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jacqueline K. Hamra, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

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

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Johnny E. Smith, appeals the judgment of conviction entered by the Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County after a jury found him guilty of one count of possession of a controlled substance, RSMo § 195.202 (1994). We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal files and find the judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and no error of law appears. As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4128 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4128

   To amend title 23, United States Code, concerning eligibility for 
     grants to implement alcohol-impaired driving counter measures.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 20, 1996

Mr. Blumenauer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 23, United States Code, concerning eligibility for 
     grants to implement alcohol-impaired driving counter measures.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ALCOHOL-IMPAIRED DRIVING COUNTER MEASURES.

    Section 410(d) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
            ``(8) Establishment of a vehicle forfeiture system for 
        persons operating a motor vehicle with a license which has been 
        suspended or revoked as a result of operating a motor vehicle 
        while under the influence of alcohol.''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 591 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 591

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to ban activities of 
  political action committees in elections for Federal office and to 
 reduce the limitation on contributions to candidates by persons other 
               than multicandidate political committees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 19, 1995

 Mr. Poshard introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to ban activities of 
  political action committees in elections for Federal office and to 
 reduce the limitation on contributions to candidates by persons other 
               than multicandidate political committees.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. BAN ON ACTIVITIES OF POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES IN 
              ELECTIONS FOR FEDERAL OFFICE.

    (a) In General.--Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new section:

  ``ban on federal election activities by political action committees

    ``Sec. 324. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no 
person other than an individual or a political committee may make 
contributions, solicit or receive contributions, or make expenditures 
for the purpose of influencing an election for Federal office.''.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION IN LIMITATION ON CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES BY 
              PERSONS OTHER THAN MULTICANDIDATE POLITICAL COMMITTEES.

    Section 315(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
(2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking out ``$1,000'' and 
inserting in lieu thereof ``$500''.

                                 <all>
```
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 659

To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit Federal firearms licensees

to conduct firearms business with other such licensees at out-of-State

gun shows.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 24, 1995

Mr. OBERSTAR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit Federal

firearms licensees to conduct firearms business with

other such licensees at out-of-State gun shows.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORITY OF FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENS4 EES TO CONDUCT FIREARMS BUSINESS WITH

5 OTHER SUCH LICENSEES AT OUT-OF-STATE

6 GUN SHOWS.

7 Section 923(j) of title 18, United States Code, is

8 amended by inserting after the 1st sentence the following:

9 ‘‘Notwithstanding the immediately preceding sentence, a
2

•HR 659 IH

1 licensee may conduct firearms business with another li2 censee at such a gun show or event without regard to

3 whether the gun show or event is located in the State

4 which is specified on the license.’’.

Æ
FREDDIE LAWRENCE , Appellant,

v. STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
CASE NO. 1D 13

- 5083

_______ ______________________/ Opinion filed October 23, 2014. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Mallory D. Cooper , Judge

. Freddie Lawrence, pro se , Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Lauren Brudnicki, Assistant Attorney Genera l, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. Appellant, Fre ddie Lawrence, appeals an order summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rul e of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and challenges the denial of relief as to Gr ounds 4 and 11. Weagree with the State’s concession that reversal is warranted as to Ground 4 given that the record attachments do not conclusively refute Appellant’s allegation that
trial counsel told him the night before trial that she rejected the Sta te’s plea offer because she was ready to proceed to trial. See Wain w right v. State , 896 So. 2d 695, 698 (Fla. 2004) (noting that a defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction relief claim unless the motion and record conclusively s how that he or she is entitled to no relief or where the claim is legally insufficient). As such, we reverse the order as to Ground 4 and remand with instructions that the
trial court hold an e videntiary hearing on the claim or attach portions of the reco rd conclusively refuting the claim. As for Ground 11, in which Appellant claimed that , pursuant to Montgomery
v. State , 70 So. 3d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), the trial court committed fundamental

e rror during his trial by giving an erroneous manslaught er by act jury instruction, we agree with the State’s contention that the claim was untimely and that none of the exceptions to the two

- year time limitation in rule 3.850 are applicable to this
claim

. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b) (prov iding for a two

- year time limitation in which to file a postconviction claim); see also Surinach v. State , 110 So. 3d 95, 95 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (“Amended motions for postconviction relief are subject to the

two

- year time limit for filing rule 3.850 motions unless they merely enlarge an issue or issues raised in the original motion.”). To the extent that Appellant argues

2in this proceeding that his appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to raise the

erro neous jury instruction issue in his direct appeal, we dismissed Appe llant’s habeas corpus petition raising that argument because it too was untimely. See
Lawrence v. State , 92 So. 3d 855 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). 1 AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED with
instructions.
LEWIS , C.J., BENTON and RAY , J J

. , CO NCUR.

1 Appellant’s direct appeal was pending when we issued our decision in Montgomery , holding that intent to kill is not an element of manslaughter by act and that it was fundamental error to give an instruction suggesting that the State was required to prove intent to kill to prove the crime of manslaughter. See 70 So. 3d at 604

- 07. 3
```

                                                                                                       Exhibit 32.1

                                  Certification of Chief Executive Officer under
                                   Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

         I hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of O’Sullivan Industries Holdings, Inc. for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and that the information contained in such annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of O’Sullivan Industries Holdings, Inc.

Date: September 28, 2004                                                      /s/ Robert S. Parker
                                                              -----------------------------------------------------
         Robert S. Parker
                                                                      President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to O’Sullivan Industries
Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by O’Sullivan Industries Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

                                                                                                       Exhibit 32.2

                                  Certification of Chief Financial Officer under
                                   Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

         I hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of O’Sullivan Industries Holdings, Inc. for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and that the information contained in such annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of O’Sullivan Industries Holdings, Inc.

                                                                        /s/Rick A. Walters
Date: September 28, 2004                                      -----------------------------------------------------

                                                                                 Rick A. Walters
                                                                            Executive Vice President
                                                                           and Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to O’Sullivan Industries
Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by O’Sullivan Industries Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,563
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         913,033
<DEPRECIATION>                                 105,979
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 825,293
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        474,673
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           234
<OTHER-SE>                                     310,934
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   825,293
<SALES>                                        116,006
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               116,677
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   41,758
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,959
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 27,116
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             27,116
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    27,116
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.17
        

</TABLE>
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 China Vitup Health Care Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 (the Report), I, Feng Gu, 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: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  August 16, 2010 /s/Feng Gu, Chief Executive Officer
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Center for Research Resources; Special Emphasis Panel Oregon NPRC.                     

*Date:*                         October 28-30, 2008.                     

*Time:*                         8 p.m. to 5 p.m.                     

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         Hilton Portland & Executive Tower, 921 SW.  Sixth Avenue, Portland, OR 97204.                     

*Contact Person:*                         Carol Lambert, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Office of Review,  National Center for Research Resources,  National Institutes of Health,  6701 Democracy Blvd., 1 Dem. Plaza, Room 1076,  Bethesda, MD 20892,  301-435-0814,                         *lambert@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.371, Biomedical Technology; 93.389, Research Infrastructure; 93.306, 93.333, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: August 5, 2008. 

Anna Snouffer, 

Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E8-18507 Filed 8-12-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  U NITED S TATES OF A MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 02-4501



# 
J AMES C LARK , Defendant-Appellant. 

# 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonard D. Wexler, Senior District Judge, sitting by designation. (CR-01-445) Submitted: February 27, 2003 Decided: March 14, 2003 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSELMatthew W. Greene, SMITH & GREENE, P.L.L.C., Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Justin W. Williams, Assistant United States Attorney, Dennis M. Kennedy, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION
PER CURIAM: James Clark was convicted of unauthorized use of access devicesand possession of fifteen or more unauthorized access devices, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2) and § 1029 (a)(3) (2000), respectively. He was sentenced to forty-six months of imprisonment for each conviction, to run concurrently, and ordered to pay $104,029.49in restitution. On appeal, he alleges that there was insufficient evidence of his intent to defraud—a necessary element for both offenses. See United States v. Akinkoye , 185 F.3d 192, 199-200 (4th Cir. 1999). For the reasons that follow, we affirm.We must affirm a conviction challenged on the grounds of insufficient evidence if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable tothe government, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Glasser v. United States , 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). Further, we do not review witness credibility on appeal. United States v. Saunders , 886 F.2d 56, 60 (4th Cir. 1989). Viewing the evidence as we must, we find that the jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Clark knowingly committed fraud when he obtained credit cards based upon another person’s name and social security number and used the cards to accumulatelarge losses for the credit companies involved. This evidence was sufficient to meet the fraudulent intent element of the crimes. Akinkoye , 185 F.3d at 199-200. Accordingly, we affirm Clark’s convictions. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately addressed in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED 2 U NITED S TATES v. C LARK
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-08-001-CV

IN RE TRACY LIBBY	RELATOR

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

	ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	The court has considered relator's petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency relief and is of the opinion that relief should be denied.  Accordingly, relator's petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency relief are denied.

	Relator shall pay all costs of this original proceeding, for which let execution issue.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL B:  MCCOY, HOLMAN, and GARDNER, JJ.

DELIVERED: January 4, 2008
#### In the Matter of the Application of Albert F. Gescheidt, Jr., for License and Admission to Practice as an Official Examiner of Title.

Application granted and bond approved. Present — Woodward, Jenks, Gaynor, Burr and Rich, JJ.