alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 53908]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21666]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Subcommittee 
Meeting on Materials, Metallurgy & Reactor Fuels; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Materials, Metallurgy & Reactor Fuels will 
hold a meeting on October 1, 2008, at 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland, Room T-2B3.
    The meeting will be open to public attendance.
    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:

Wednesday October 1, 2008--8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.

    The Subcommittee will receive a briefing on the proposed rule 
amendment to 10 CFR 50.61, ``Alternate Fracture Toughness Requirements 
for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events.'' The 
Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with 
representatives of the NRC staff and other interested persons regarding 
this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant 
issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as 
appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Officer, Mr. 
Michael Benson (Telephone: 301-415-6396) 5 days prior to the meeting, 
if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic 
recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting 
that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and 
participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register 
on September 26, 2007 (72 FR 54695).
    Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. 
(ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the 
above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting 
to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda.

    Dated: September 9, 2008.
Cayetano Santos,
Chief, Reactor Safety Branch A, ACRS.
[FR Doc. E8-21666 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
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.

December 14, 2005


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


                                       16
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 06-cr-022-01-PB

Richard Post

O R D E R

On July 16, 2012, defendant was brought before the court 

for his initial appearance and preliminary hearing under Fed. R. 

Crim. P. 32.1 on two alleged violations of conditions of 

supervision, as charged in the government's petition dated June 

28, 2012 (doc. no. 99). Defendant is on release from his

conviction in 2007 for conspiracy to distribute and to possess 

with intent to distribute cocaine base “crack” in violation of 

21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1)

Defendant stipulated to probable cause on the violations. 

I therefore find probable cause that defendant has violated the 

conditions as charged in the petition. 

Defendant sought release on conditions under Rule 

32.1(a)(6). The government sought detention. Under Rule 

32.1(a)(6), defendant bears the burden of establishing by clear 

Case 1:06-cr-00022-PB Document 101 Filed 07/16/12 Page 1 of 3
2

and convincing evidence that he will not flee and that he poses 

no danger to any other person or to the community. At the 

hearing, the court summarized its findings orally from the 

bench. Those oral findings are incorporated herein. Based on 

the evidence presented at the hearing, and for the reasons 

stated on the record, defendant failed to meet his burden of 

persuading the court that he poses no danger to any other person

or to the community. 

In sum, the court finds that defendant did not meet his

burden to show by clear and convincing evidence that his

release, even on strict conditions, would pose no danger to any 

other person or the community. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that 

the defendant be detained pending a final revocation hearing. 

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 

Case 1:06-cr-00022-PB Document 101 Filed 07/16/12 Page 2 of 3
3

States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection 

with a court proceeding. 

SO ORDERED.

 

Landya B. McCafferty

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: June 16, 2012

 

cc: Harry Batchelder, Esq.

Robert J. Veiga, Esq.

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:06-cr-00022-PB Document 101 Filed 07/16/12 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Plaintiff,

Civil Action No. 06-cv-37-

Dynamic Network Systems, Inc.

Timothy Wilde

Defendant

AFFIDA VIT OF SERVICE

Judith A. Van Kalken, under oath affirm as follows:

1. I 

Green, P.

2. On February 14, 2006, Deputy Mark , a Deputy Sheriff with the

Merrimack County Sheriff s Office served Timothy Wilde, a non-resident defendant, by

serving the New Hampshire Secretary of State with copies of the Summons in a Civil

Action, Complaint, ECF Notice, Corporate Disclosure pursuant to Local Rule 7. , Notice

of Assignment to U.S. Magistrate Judge and a copy of the civil cover sheet, along with a

check in the amount of$10. 00 in the 

A true copy of the Merrimack County Sheriff s return of service is attached as Exhibit A.

3. On February 27 2006, I served the Defendant, Timothy Wilde by sending, via

registered mail to Mr. Wilde at 1175 Lake Boulevard, No. 105, Davis, CA, copies of the

Summons in a Civil Action, Complaint, ECF Notice, Notice of Assignment to U.S.

Magistrate Judge, Corporate Disclosure pursuant to Local Rule 7. , the Civil Cover sheet

Case 1:06-cv-00037-JM Document 7 Filed 03/29/2006 Page 1 of 2
and an attested to copy of the Merrimack County Sheriff s Return of Service on the New

Hampshire Secretary of State in the above-captioned case, pursuant to NHRSA 510:4. A

true copy of the registered letter sent by me to the defendant, is attached as Exhibit B.

4. The United , 2006 and left

Notice of the registered mail envelope. The United States Postal Service 

notice of the registered mail on March 9 2006. To date, Mr. Wilde has not claimed the

registered mail at the post office. Attached as Exhibit C is a true copy of the United State

Postal Service Intranet Item Inquiry, which indicates that Mr. Wilde was notified of the

package and has not claimed his registered mail.

5. I , counsel for the Plaintiff in this case, that

the Defendant, Timothy Wilde has received copies of the Complaint and Amended

Complaint. The Defendant therefore 

This ends my affidavit testimony.

Dated: March 29 2006

Isl Judith A. 

Judith A. Van Kalken

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

COUNTY OF HILLSBOROUGH

Before me, the undersigned officer, personally appeared Judith A. Van Kalken

and under oath stated that the above Affidavit subscribed by her is true, to the best of her

knowledge, information and belief.

Isl Susan Pillsburv

Justice of the Peace/Notary Public

My commission expires: 12/18/07

Case 1:06-cv-00037-JM Document 7 Filed 03/29/2006 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 06-cr-20-JD

Mohammad Malik

O R D E R

After reviewing the Presentence Investigation Report and the

list of corporations who are entitled to restitution, I have

determined that it is necessary for me to recuse myself from

sentencing the defendant in this case.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

October 9, 2007

cc: William E. Christie, Esquire

Donald Feith, Esquire

Case 1:06-cr-00020-PB Document 35 Filed 10/09/07 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>   1
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10(b)

                             FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
                            QUAKER STATE CORPORATION
                           1994 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

         This First Amendment made effective the 24th day of October, 1996 by
Quaker State Corporation (the "Corporation")

                                  WITNESSETH:

         WHEREAS, the Corporation established the Quaker State Corporation 1994
Stock Incentive Plan on May 12, 1994 (the "Plan"); and

     WHEREAS, the Plan may be amended in accordance with SECTION 11 thereof; and

         WHEREAS, the Corporation wishes to amend the Plan as a result of
changes in the requirements of Rule 16b-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended;

         NOW, THEREFORE, under the powers retained by the Corporation's Board
of Directors under SECTION 11 of the Plan and pursuant to the authorization of
the Board of Directors granted on October 24, 1996, the Corporation hereby
amends the Plan as follows:

1.       The first paragraph of Section 1, ADMINISTRATION, is hereby amended by
deleting sub-part (i) thereof and substituting the following in lieu thereof:

         "(i) a "non-employee director" as defined under Rule 16b-3(b)(3) under
         the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "1934 Act"), or
         any successor Rule".

2.       Section 3, SHARES AVAILABLE UNDER THE PLAN, is hereby amended,
effective May 16, 1996, by deleting "1,250,000 shares" from the second line
thereof and substituting the following in lieu thereof "1,362,978 shares".

3.       Section 10, WITHHOLDING, is hereby amended by deleting the third
paragraph thereof in its entirety.

4.       In all other respects, the provisions of the Plan are hereby ratified
and confirmed, and shall continue in full force and effect.  In order to
continue to set forth all provisions of the Plan in a single document, the
changes made by this First Amendment may be incorporated into a restatement of
the Plan.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has evidenced the adoption of this
First Amendment to the Plan by the signature of its duly authorized officer.



                                        QUAKER STATE CORPORATION
                                        
Attest:                                 
                                        By:  /s/ Paul E. Konney             
                                             ------------------             
  /s/ Carrie L. Sherwood                     Paul E. Konney
  --------------------------                 Senior Vice President, General
  Assistant Secretary                        Counsel and Secretary
                                        

         (SEAL)
#### HOME INS. CO. et al. v. HIGHWAY INS. UNDERWRITERS.

No. 3399.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

June 29, 1951.

*299Nicholls Pugh, Jr., Lafayette, for appellants.

Porteous & Johnson, New Orleans, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff Ivan Carline filed an application for rehearing based primarily on the case of National Retailers Mutual Insurance Company v. American Fidelity and Casualty Company, La.App., 51 So.2d 842, decided by the Second Circuit Court of Appeal. We do not believe the cited case apposite for the reason that in that case the plaintiff was made a party-appellee without any change in the nature or extent of the claim and the Court held that the filing of this supplemental petition naming the assured as a party plaintiff was the curing of a technical defect as to parties plaintiff, whereas in the present case Car-line is not accepting the petition as filed but is asserting an independent claim on his own behalf and which was not contained or included in the original suit. It cannot be said that Carline was made a party plaintiff to cure a technical defect. He has come in as a plaintiff after more than one year and is attempting to enforce his claim not previously asserted and we believe that our original opinion is correct and the motion for rehearing is therefore denied.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Douglas MacLeod, certify that:

 

1.             Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered bythis report on Form 10-K of CNH Equipment Trust 2018-B (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.             Basedon my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Basedon my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the periodcovered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.             Iam responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted inpreparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the ExchangeAct periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.             Allof the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports onassessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance withItem 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I havereasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A.

 

 

 

March 30, 2022
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1
                                                                                
                         SECURITY CAPITAL PACIFIC TRUST
               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                         (Dollar amounts in thousands)

                                  (Unaudited)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                Three Months Ended
                                                     March 31,                     Twelve Months Ended December 31,
                                                -------------------     -------------------------------------------------------
                                                 1998        1997       1997 (1)      1996         1995       1994        1993
                                                -------     -------     -------     --------     --------    -------    -------
<S>                                             <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>          <C>         <C>        <C>
Earnings from operations......................  $29,299     $20,276     $24,686     $ 94,089     $ 81,696    $46,719    $23,191
Add:
 Interest expense.............................   15,623      13,961      61,153       35,288       19,584     19,442      3,923
                                                -------     -------     -------     --------     --------    -------    -------
Earnings as adjusted..........................  $44,922     $34,237     $85,839     $129,377     $101,280    $66,161    $27,114
                                                =======     =======     =======     ========     ========    =======    =======
Fixed charges:
 Interest expense.............................  $15,623     $13,961     $61,153     $ 35,288     $ 19,584    $19,442    $ 3,923
 Capitalized interest.........................    5,214       4,427      17,606       16,941       11,741      6,029      2,818
                                                -------     -------     -------     --------     --------    -------    -------
  Total fixed charges.........................  $20,837     $18,388     $78,759     $ 52,229     $ 31,325    $25,471    $ 6,741
                                                =======     =======     =======     ========     ========    =======    =======
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges............      2.2         1.9         1.1          2.5          3.2        2.6        4.0
                                                =======     =======     =======     ========     ========    =======    =======
</TABLE>

--------------
(1) Earnings from operations for 1997 includes a one-time, non-cash charge of
    $71.7 million associated with costs incurred in acquiring the management
    companies from an affiliate. Excluding this charge, the ratio of earnings to
    fixed charges for the year ended December 31, 1997 would be 2.0.

                                      27
#### George BOUDREAUX v. MOON OIL COMPANY, Inc. (Marrs McLEAN, Intervener and Third Opponent).

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Jan. 21, 1935.

McCoy, King & Jones and Charles P. Siess, all of Lake Charles, for appellants.

Lewis & Lewis, of Opelousas, for appellee.

ELLIOTT, Judge.

In this case, for the reasons assigned in acting on the claim of George W. Boudreaux v. Moon Oil Company (Marrs McLean, Inter-vener & Third Opponent), 158 So. 672, in affirming the judgment therein rendered in favor of George W.- Boudreaux signed April 25, 1934, the further judgment in favor of said Boudreaux against Marrs McLean, signed July 2, 1934, is also affirmed. Costs are to he paid as stated in the opinion in these consolidated cases heretofore handed down. *>*
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Gina M. Skidds

v. Case No. 05-cv-383-SM

Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner

Social Security Administration

O R D E R

Judgment shall be entered affirming the decision of the Administrative Law Judge on remand,

dated December 15, 2006, and the case closed.

SO ORDERED.

December 26, 2006 _________________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Maureen A. Howard, Esq.

David L. Broderick, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00383-SM Document 13 Filed 12/26/06 Page 1 of 1