alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 179 (Monday, September 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 53264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21394]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-5240-N-01]


Notice of FHA Debenture Call

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing 
Commissioner, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice announces a debenture recall of certain Federal 
Housing Administration (FHA) debentures, in accordance with authority 
provided in the National Housing Act.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yong Sun, FHA Financial Reporting 
Division, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, 
SW., Room 5148, Washington, DC 20410, telephone 202-402-4778. This is 
not a toll-free number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 207(j) of the National 
Housing Act, 12 U.S.C. 1713(j), and in accordance with HUD's regulation 
at 24 CFR 207.259(e)(3), the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal 
Housing Commissioner, with the approval of the Secretary of the 
Treasury, announces the call of all FHA debentures, with a coupon rate 
of 5.50 percent or above, except for those debentures subject to 
``debenture lock agreements,'' that have been registered on the books 
of the Bureau of the Public Debt, Department of the Treasury, and are, 
therefore, ``outstanding'' as of September 30, 2008. The date of the 
call is January 1, 2009.
    The debentures will be redeemed at par plus accrued interest. 
Interest will cease to accrue on the debentures as of the call date. At 
redemption, final interest on any called debentures will be paid along 
with the principal. Payment of final principal and interest due on 
January 1, 2009 will be made automatically to the registered holder.
    During the period from the date of this notice to the call date, 
debentures that are subject to the call may not be used by the 
mortgagee for a special redemption purchase in payment of a mortgage 
insurance premium.
    No transfer of debentures covered by the foregoing call will be 
made on the books maintained by the Treasury Department on or after 
December 15, 2008. This debenture call does not affect the right of the 
holder of a debenture to sell or assign the debenture on or after this 
date.

    Dated: August 4, 2008.
Ronald Y. Spraker,
Acting General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing 
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. E8-21394 Filed 9-12-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 6, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 6955]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2118]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. CP08-46-000]


Tarpon Whitetail Gas Storage, LLC; Notice of Public Scoping 
Meeting and Site Visit for the Proposed Whitetail Natural Gas Storage 
Project

January 30, 2008.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) 
will conduct a public scoping meeting and site visit for the Whitetail 
Natural Gas Storage Project involving construction and operation of 
natural gas storage, pipeline, and compressor station facilities by 
Tarpon Whitetail Gas Storage, LLC (Whitetail) in Monroe County, 
Mississippi.
    We invite you to attend the public scoping meeting beginning at 7 
p.m. (CST) on Thursday evening, February 14, 2008, to provide 
environmental comments on the proposed project. Your input will help us 
determine the issues that need to be evaluated in the environmental 
assessment. The public scoping meeting will be held at: Monroe County 
Court House, 201 W. Commerce, Aberdeen, Mississippi 39730, Phone: 662-
369-8143.
    The Commission staff will also conduct a site visit of the location 
of the proposed facilities. The site visit will begin at approximately 
1 p.m. (CST) on February 14, 2008. Anyone interested in participating 
in the site visit may attend; however, they must provide their own 
transportation. The Commission staff, company representatives, and 
interested participants will meet in the parking lot at the following 
location: Shelaines Restaurant, 202 Hwy 145 North, Aberdeen, 
Mississippi 39730, Phone: 662-369-3352.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-2118 Filed 2-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
IA

Union Calendar No. 253

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 87

[Report No. 107–425]

Approving the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the development of a

repository for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent

nuclear fuel, pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 11, 2002

Mr. BARTON of Texas (for himself, Mr. BOUCHER, Mr. UPTON, Mr. TOWNS,

Mr. TAUZIN, Mr. BURR of North Carolina, Mr. WYNN, Mr. WHITFIELD,

Mr. RUSH, Mr. NORWOOD, Mr. SHIMKUS, and Mr. PICKERING) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee

on Energy and Commerce

MAY 1, 2002

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union

and ordered to be printed

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the development of a repository for the disposal of high-level

radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, pursuant to

the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HJ 87 RH

1 That there hereby is approved the site at Yucca Mountain,

2 Nevada, for a repository, with respect to which a notice

3 of disapproval was submitted by the Governor of the State

4 of Nevada on April 8, 2002.

Union Calendar No. 253

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 87

[Report No. 107–425]

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for

the development of a repository for the disposalof high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclearfuel, pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Actof 1982.

MAY 1, 2002

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6709

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RONALDO TYNELL LIGHTFOOT, a/k/a Tynell,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District

Judge. (CR-98-150)

Submitted: August 14, 2003 Decided: August 21, 2003

Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronaldo Tynell Lightfoot, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Ronaldo Tynell Lightfoot seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his petition for writ of error coram nobis. We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. United States v. Lightfoot, No. CR-98-150

(E.D. Va. Apr. 11, 2003). 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 the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
##### 



EXHIBIT 12.2 ARCHSTONE-SMITH OPERATING TRUST
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES
AND PREFERRED UNIT DISTRIBUTIONS (Dollar amounts in thousands) (Unaudited) Three Months EndedMarch 31,
    
    
    Twelve Months Ended December 31,2005(1)
    
    
    2004(1)
    
    
    2004(1)
    
    
    2003(1)
    
    
    2002(1)
    
    
    2001(1)
    
    
    2000(1)Earnings from operations
    
    $
    9,508
    
    
    $
    34,209
    
    
    $
    129,164
    
    
    $
    128,319
    
    
    $
    136,146
    
    
    $
    107,399
    
    
    $
    128,023Add:Interest expense
    
    
    49,275
    
    
    
    39,432
    
    
    
    169,515
    
    
    
    148,789
    
    
    
    150,112
    
    
    
    80,779
    
    
    
    94,529Earnings as adjusted
    
    $
    58,783
    
    
    $
    73,641
    
    
    $
    298,679
    
    
    $
    277,108
    
    
    $
    286,258
    
    
    $
    188,178
    
    
    $
    222,552Combined fixed charges and Preferred Unit distributions:Interest expense
    
    $
    49,275
    
    
    $
    39,432
    
    
    $
    169,515
    
    
    $
    148,789
    
    
    $
    150,112
    
    
    $
    80,779
    
    
    $
    94,529Capitalized interest
    
    
    8,219
    
    
    
    5,915
    
    
    
    23,572
    
    
    
    26,854
    
    
    
    32,377
    
    
    
    29,186
    
    
    
    37,079Total fixed charges
    
    
    57,494
    
    
    
    45,347
    
    
    
    193,087
    
    
    
    175,643
    
    
    
    182,489
    
    
    $
    109,965
    
    
    $
    131,608Preferred Unit distributions
    
    
    1,698
    
    
    
    4,447
    
    
    
    16,254
    
    
    
    26,153
    
    
    
    34,309
    
    
    
    25,877
    
    
    
    25,340Combined fixed charges and Preferred Unit distributions.
    
    $
    59,192
    
    
    $
    49,794
    
    
    $
    209,341
    
    
    $
    201,796
    
    
    $
    216,798
    
    
    $
    135,842
    
    
    $
    156,948Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and
Preferred Unit distributions
    
    
    1.0
    
    
    
    1.5
    
    
    
    1.4
    
    
    
    1.4
    
    
    
    1.3
    
    
    
    1.4
    
    
    
    1.4
   (1)
    
    Net earnings from discontinued operations have been reclassified for all periods
presented.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 05-cr-170-01-SM

Linda Tremblay

O R D E R

Defendant's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 23) is granted.

Trial has been rescheduled for the June 2006 trial period. Defendant shall file a Waiver of

Speedy Trial Rights not later than April 3, 2006. On the filing of such waiver, his

continuance shall be effective.

The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh

the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the

defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account the

Case 1:05-cr-00170-SM Document 24 Filed 03/29/06 Page 1 of 2
2

exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Final Pretrial Conference: June 13, 2006 at 11:30 AM

Jury Selection: June 20, 2006 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

March 29, 2006 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Helen Fitzgibbon, Esq.

 Paul Maggiotto, Esq. 

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00170-SM Document 24 Filed 03/29/06 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Katherine Gatsas

v. Case No. 05-cv-315-SM

Manchester School District

ORDER

Re: Document No. 61, Motion to Amend [54] Amended Complaint

Ruling: Motion previously orally denied at pretrial

conference. The proposed amendment would require further delay of

the scheduled trial in an already aging case, raises new issues

that would require reopening discovery, and appears to relate to a

temporally unrelated matter. Moreover, defendant agrees to

plaintiff’s seeking compensatory damages through the jury’s

verdict, which would cover any injury (through verdict) claimed.

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief District Judge

Date: November 14, 2007

cc: Leslie Johnson, Esq. 

Kathleen Peahl, Esq. 

Case 1:05-cv-00315-SM Document 79 Filed 11/14/07 Page 1 of 1
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Tchilingurian, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sherman, J.), rendered November 23, 1988, convicting him of attempted rape in the first degree, assault in the second degree, and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

The defendant contends that he was improperly denied the minutes of the *Wade*hearing conducted six months prior to trial. We disagree. The court properly determined that the hearing transcript was not discoverable under CPL 240.45 and *People v Rosario*(9 NY2d 286, *cert denied*368 US 866). Since the hearing transcript was equally available to the defendant and the prosecution, the defendant had the responsibility to obtain it if he believed it necessary *(see, People v Bradley,*119 AD2d 993; *People v Frank,*107 AD2d 1057).

The defendant further contends that his guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt in view of several inconsis*437tencies between the identification testimony of the two main prosecution witnesses and his appearance on the night of the crime, and given the alibi testimony proffered by the defense. However, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses *(see, People v Gaimari,*176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record *(see, People v Garafolo,*44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]). Brown, J. P., Hooper, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-1277

___________________________

Md Iftiar Uddin

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General of the United States

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

Submitted: October 27, 2017

Filed: November 7, 2017

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the decision by an

immigration judge (IJ) to deny Md Iftiar Uddin’s application for asylum, withholding

of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture, finding that

Uddin’s allegations were not credible. Uddin petitions for review. We deny the

petition.
Uddin is a national and citizen of Bangladesh. According to his testimony and

submissions during his administrative proceedings, Uddin was a local leader in the

Bangladesh National Party and was attacked and threatened by members of the rival

Awami League with the complicity of the police. We conclude that substantial

evidence supports the decision to discredit Uddin’s account because a “reasonable

adjudicator would [not] be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” Osonowo v.

Mukasey, 521 F.3d 922, 927 (8th Cir. 2008) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B))

(alteration added). Uddin repeatedly misstated the circumstances of how he joined

the BNP, claiming to have presented a national identification card that in fact was not

issued until three years later. Uddin’s unsupported account of police collusion with

the Awami League was in tension with the fact that Bangladesh was controlled by an

unaffiliated “caretaker” government at the relevant time. Uddin also gave three

different accounts of the attack that allegedly prompted him to leave the country,

changing details about where it happened, who was with him, and whether his

companions were attacked as well.

The justifications Uddin offers for these and other discrepancies, while

plausible, are not compelled by the record, so we will not overrule the credibility

findings of the IJ and the BIA. See Khrystotodorov v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 775, 783

(8th Cir. 2008) (“A reviewing court may not supersede an agency finding simply

because an alternative finding could also be supported.”). Further, Uddin’s

contradictions and omissions are not minor but relate to the nature and cause of his

alleged persecution. See Chakhov v. Lynch, 837 F.3d 843, 847 (8th Cir. 2016); cf.

8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii), 1229a(c)(4)(C) (providing that credibility

determinationsin immigration cases can be based on the plausibility, consistency, and

accuracy of the applicant’s statements “without regard to whether an inconsistency,

inaccuracy, or falsehood goes to the heart of the applicant’s claim”).

The petition is denied.

______________________________

-2-
<PAGE> 1

                                   Exhibit 32.2

                                Pyramid Oil Company

                   Certification of the Chief Financial Officer
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
                       As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906
                        Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned
Chief Financial Officer of Pyramid Oil Company (the "Company"), hereby
certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of
the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the "Report") fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




     Date: September 10, 2010

                                                LEE G. CHRISTIANSON
                                                -------------------
                                                Lee G. Christianson
                                              Chief Financial Officer
Case 1:05-cv-00159-JM   Document 21   Filed 05/16/06   Page 1 of 4

Case 1:05-cv-00159-JM   Document 21   Filed 05/16/06   Page 2 of 4

Case 1:05-cv-00159-JM   Document 21   Filed 05/16/06   Page 3 of 4

Case 1:05-cv-00159-JM   Document 21   Filed 05/16/06   Page 4 of 4
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF

THE UNITED STATES CODE

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Rewards Network Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald L. Blake, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | 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
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

May 7, 2009



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ RONALD L. BLAKE                                  
|Ronald L. Blake President and Chief Executive Officer



28
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Isaac Kier, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of MPLC, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

      (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

      (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

      (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

      (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

      (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

June 14, 2006


/s/ Isaac Kier
----------------------
Isaac Kier
President, Secretary
Treasurer and Director


                                       15
Order entered December 5, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00831-CV

AALIYAH MARSHALL & ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS, Appellant

V.

CEDAR GLEN APARTMENTS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-22-03692-D

ORDER

On November 14, 2022, after court reporter Coral L. Wahlen informed the 

Court that appellant had not requested the reporter’s record, we directed appellant 

to file, within ten days, written verification she had requested the record. Although 

we cautioned appellant that failure to comply could result in the appeal being 

submitted without the reporter’s record, see TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c), appellant has 

yet to comply. Accordingly, we ORDER the appeal submitted without the 

reporter’s record. See id.
As the clerk’s record has been filed, we ORDER appellant to file her brief 

no later than January 4, 2023.

/s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III

JUSTICE