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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11411] 

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration. 

# ACTION:

Amendment 3. 

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Florida (FEMA-1785-DR), dated 08/24/2008. 

*Incident:*                         Tropical Storm Fay.                     

*Incident Period:*                         08/18/2008 and Continuing.                     

*Effective Date:*                         09/08/2008.                     

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         10/23/2008.                     

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         05/25/2009.                     

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX, 76155. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Florida, dated 08/24/2008, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster. 

*Primary Counties:*                     Clay, Flagler, Gulf, Highlands, Martin, Nassau, Palm Beach, Suwannee, Taylor, Volusia.                 

Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only): 

Georgia: Camden. 

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell, 

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. E8-21409 Filed 9-12-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
EXHIBIT 31.7

Certification Pursuant to Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act

I, Thomas M. OFlynn,
certify that:

1.

I
have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of PSEG Energy Holdings
L.L.C.;

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 registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The
registrant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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The
registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrant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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.

|Date:   October 30, 2003 | /s/ Thomas
  M. OFlynn      
|------------------------ | -----------------------------
|                         |                              
|                         | Thomas M. OFlynn            
|                         | PSEG Energy
  Holdings L.L.C.
|                         | Chief
  Financial Officer
* 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. 96-60306

Conference Calendar

 

LOUELLA FAY YOUNG STRICKLAND,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

RANKIN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY;

ROBERT PEEDEE ET AL.,

Defendants,

BRANDON CARTER ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:95-CV-85BN

- - - - - - - - - -

June 18, 1997

Before SMITH, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Louella Strickland, Mississippi prisoner #72676, seeks leave

to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on her appeal from the

dismissal of her civil rights action as frivolous. Strickland’s

motion is GRANTED. The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA)
No. 96-60306

- 2 -

requires a prisoner appealing IFP in a civil action to pay the

full amount of the filing fee, $105. As Strickland does not have

funds for immediate payment of this fee, she is assessed an

initial partial filing fee of $3.49, in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(1). Following payment of the initial partial filing

fee, the remainder will be deducted from Strickland’s prison

trust-fund account until the entire filing fee is paid. 

§ 1915(b)(2).

IT IS ORDERED that Strickland authorize the appropriate

prison authorities to withdraw the initial partial filing fee in

accordance with the procedures required by the prison and to

forward payment to the clerk of the District Court for the

Southern District of Mississippi. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the

agency having custody of Strickland’s inmate account shall

collect the remainder of the $105 filing fee and forward for

payment, in accordance with § 1915(b)(2), to the clerk of the

District Court of the Southern District of Mississippi each time

the amount in Strickland’s account exceeds $10, until the

appellate filing fee is paid. 

Strickland contends that the facility in which she is

imprisoned is overcrowded and lacks air-conditioning in some

buildings and that jail officials were deliberately indifferent

to her medical needs. Strickland discusses the relevant law but

references no facts relevant to her particular situation. Nor

does she attempt to apply the law to the facts of her case. 
No. 96-60306

- 3 -

Strickland has failed to brief any issues for appeal. Grant v.

Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 525 (5th Cir. 1995). Consequently, her

appeal is dismissed as frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
#### LUBY CHEVROLET COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Robert Elmer KING, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Sept. 14, 1956.

Schwarz & Zinn, Miami, for .appellant.

Charles J. Bodner, Miami, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on to be heard on the motion of the appellee to affirm the judgment appealed from pursuant to 31 F.S.A., Rule 38 of the rules of this court and it appearing to the court from an examination of the record that said motion is appropriate and seasonably made and that it is manifest that the questions raised on appeál are *488without substantial merit and need no further argument,

It is accordingly ordered, adjudged and decreed that the motion to affirm the judgment appealed from he, and the same is, hereby granted, and the judgment is

Affirmed.

DREW, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB-SON and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
#### CAILLETEAU v. HIGHTOWER.

No. 5640.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

Jan. 3, 1938.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 28, 1938.

John R. Hunter & Son, of Alexandria, for appellant.

R. B. Sadler, Jr., of Alexandria, and J. L. Warren Woodville, of. New Orleans, for appellee.

DREW, Judge.

This is a companion case and was consolidated for trial with Bradshaw Watson v. Charles D. Hightower, 181 So. 612, decided by us this day, and for the reasons, assigned by us in that case, we find the judgment of the lower court holding defendant liable to plaintiff for damages received in that accident, is correct.

Defendant seriously questions the amount awarded plaintiff by the lower court and asks that it be reduced. The lower court awarded plaintiff judgment of $2,000.00. He sued for $5,250.00. He alleged the injuries received by him were as follows:

He was rendered unconscious for several days, suffered long, deep laceration of the forehead and over the left eye, fracture of the skull, severe contusions and bruises all over his body. Was confined in a hospital for nine days, and further confined to his bed for three weeks, and was unable to work for seven weeks. He itemized his damages as follows:

> Medical and hospital fees,... .$150.00

> Pain and suffering,.5000.00

> Loss of wages.100.00

Plaintiff was a’minor at the time this suit was filed in his behalf by his father. Before the case was tried, he became of age and was made party-plaintiff in the stead of his father. He paid no hospital and medical bills himself and none were proven. That item passes from the case. There was no proof offered on the item of loss of wages, leaving the only remaining item to be that for pain and suffering. As has been many times stated, there is.no fixed rule to be governed by in awarding damages for pain and suffering. In this case, plaintiff is shown to have suffered a great deal. It was not, however, of very long duration. He was able to be about his business in about seven weeks.

We are of the opinion at this time that the judgment is excessive by $750.00. It therefore follows that the judgment of the lower court is amended by reducing the judgment in favor of plaintiff from $2,000.00 to $1,250.00, and as amended, the judgment is affirmed. Plaintiff to pay the cost of appeal.
Case 1:05-cv-00264-SM Document 3 Filed 07/26/05 Page 1 of 1
L

    L

    L

    L

    L

		 	 	 	 		

   

    L

   

     

      L    

		 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

         

      L      

     

     

Project	Abstract	

Part 1: Please identify the applicant point of contact (POC)

Applicant POC

Organization Name

POC Name

Phone Number

Email Address

Mailing Address

Part 2: Please identify the application

Application Information

Solicitation Name

Project Title

Proposed Start Date

Proposed End Date

Funding Amount

Requested

Part 3: Please identify the project location and applicant type

Project Location and Applicant Type

Project Location (City,

State)

Applicant Type (Tribal

Nation, State, County,

City, Nonprofit, Other)

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 
Part 4: Please provide a project abstract

Enter additional project abstract information. Unless otherwise specified in the solicitation, this

information includes:

• 

• 

• 

•

•

•

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

Project    Abstract
   

		 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

                                         

                             

                                 

                                     

             

	 		 	 	 	

	 		 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

                                   

                                 

             

        

    L

L

    L

    L

    L

Part 5: Please indicate whether OJP has permission to share the project abstract

If the applicant is willing for the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), in its discretion, to make the information in the

project abstract above publicly available, please complete the consent section below. Please note, the applicant’s

decision whether to grant OJP permission to publicly release this information will not affect OJP’s funding decisions.

Also, if the application is not funded, granting permission will not guarantee that information will be shared, nor will

it guarantee funding from any other source.

Permission not granted

Permission granted (Fill in authorized official consent below.)

On behalf of the applicant named above, I consent to the information in the project abstract above (including

contact information) being made public, at the discretion of OJP consistent with applicable policies. I certify that I

have the authority to provide this consent.

Authorized Official (AO) Consent

Signature Date

AO Name

Title

Organization Name

Phone Number

Email Address

Note: This document is to be submitted as a separate attachment with a file name that

contains the words “Project Abstract.”

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6639
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMES EDWARD THOMAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-97-299-3) Submitted: June 12, 2003 Decided: June 20, 2003 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edward Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Harry Thomas Church, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: James Edward Thomas appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to compel the Government to show cause as to why it failed to file a Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Thomas , No. CR-97-299-3 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 8, 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
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Antonio Breleur, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), rendered May 10, 1988, convicting him of sodomy in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the court committed reversible error in failing to charge the jury that it could consider endangering the welfare of a child as a lesser included offense of sodomy in the first degree. We disagree. In the absence of a request to submit a lesser included offense to the jury, a court’s failure to do so does not constitute error *(see,*CPL 300.50 [2]). A review of this record indicates that the defendant failed to request that endangering the welfare of a child be charged as a lesser included offense of sodomy in the first degree.

The defendant’s further contention that the submission of an allegedly improper verdict sheet to the jury deprived him of a fair trial is not preserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Braithwaite,*154 AD2d 543; *People v Weatherly,*144 AD2d 509). Moreover, reversal in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction is not warranted under these circumstances. Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 178 (Friday, September 12, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 53028]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21353]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0129]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office 
of Management and Budget Approval; Food Canning Establishment 
Registration, Process Filing, and Recordkeeping for Acidified Foods and 
Thermally Processed Low-Acid Foods in Hermetically Sealed Containers

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a 
collection of information entitled ``Food Canning Establishment 
Registration, Process Filing, and Recordkeeping for Acidified Foods and 
Thermally Processed Low-Acid Foods in Hermetically Sealed Containers'' 
has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonna Capezzuto, Office of Information 
Management (HFA-710), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, 
Rockville, MD 20857, 301-796-3794.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of June 3, 2008 (73 
FR 31694), the agency announced that the proposed information 
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 
U.S.C. 3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the 
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0037. 
The approval expires on August 31, 2011. A copy of the supporting 
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet 
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: September 8, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E8-21353 Filed 9-11-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 17, 2017. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, November 17, 2017 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A18D0165. ROGER C. WILSON v. MARATHON INVESTMENT CORP et al. .
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 2010CV187557
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 177 (Thursday, September 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 52864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21038]



[[Page 52864]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Research Resources; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Center for Research Resources Special Emphasis Panel, October 15, 2008, 
1 p.m. to October 15, 2008, 4 p.m., National Institutes of Health, One 
Democracy Plaza, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, which 
was published in the Federal Register on August 11, 2008, 73 FR N155.
    The previously announced teleconference meeting will now be held as 
a regular meeting at the Hilton Washington/Rockville Hotel, 1750 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The meeting is closed to the 
public.

    Dated: September 4, 2008.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-21038 Filed 9-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 04-cr-200-01-SM

Jonathan Rando

O R D E R

On July 26, 2006, defendant appeared for a “probable cause”

hearing under Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1 on three alleged violations

of conditions of supervision. Defendant waived preliminary

examination on the violations. I therefore find probable cause

to hold him for a revocation hearing. 

Defendant sought bail conditions under Rule 32.1(a)(6). 

Under Rule 32.1(a)(6) defendant bears the burden of establishing

by clear and convincing evidence that he will not flee and that

he poses no danger to any other person or to the community. Here

defendant was arrested with a serrated blade knife hidden in his

waistband. He is unemployed and has been using marijuana,

morphine and heroin. He is a danger to the community. There are

no conditions which are likely to assure his presence and the

safety of the community. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant be detained

pending trial. 

Case 1:04-cr-00200-SM Document 28 Filed 07/26/06 Page 1 of 2
2

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney

General or his designated representative for confinement in a

corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from

persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal. The defendant shall be afforded a reasonable

opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On

order of a court of the United States or on request of an

attorney for the government, the person in charge of the

corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United

States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection

with a court proceeding. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: July 26, 2006

cc: Kevin E. Sharkey, Esq.

 Joseph N. Laplante, Esq.

 U.S. Marshal

 U.S. Probation

Case 1:04-cr-00200-SM Document 28 Filed 07/26/06 Page 2 of 2
LNC Non-Employee Directors Compensation, Effective July 1, 2004



 EXHIBIT 10(cc) 
  
 LNC Non-Employee Directors Compensation 
 Effective July 1, 2004 
  
 Annual Retainer: 
  

	 	•	 	$80,000 in cash 

  

	 	•	 	$80,000 in Deferred Stock Units1


  
 Annual Committee Chairperson Fee: 
  

	 	•	 	$5,000 in cash 

  
 No Meeting Fees 
  
 Annual Lead
Director Fee: 
  

	 	•	 	$25,000 in cash 

  
 TOTAL ANNUAL COMPENSATION: $160,0002 


	1	Automatically credited in stock units under the Lincoln National Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors. 

  

	2	This figure does not include any Annual Committee Chairperson Fees ($5,000) or any Annual Lead Director Fee ($25,000) that may apply, as such fees vary among the
individual Directors.