alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 #11426]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of New Hampshire (FEMA-1787-DR), dated 09/05/2008. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:*
                         07/24/2008 through 08/14/2008. *Effective Date:*
                         09/05/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         11/04/2008. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         06/05/2009.
 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: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 09/05/2008, private non-profit organizations that provide essential services of governmental nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: Primary Counties: Belknap, Coos, Grafton. Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only): New Hampshire: Carroll, Merrimack, Rockingham, Strafford, Sullivan. Maine: Oxford. Vermont: Caledonia, Essex, Orange, Windsor. The Interest Rates are: PercentOther (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.250Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage and for economic injury is 11426.
 (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. E8-21265 Filed 9-11-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Citicorp Mortgage, Inc.

                             OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE
                         ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE


                       Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc.
                        REMIC Pass-Through Certoificates
                              Per The Attached List
                              ---------------------


      I, Patsy M. Barker, Vice Presdient of Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. ("CMI"),
pursuant to the Subservicing Agreements (the Subservicing Agreements") under
which Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc. has delegated duties required to be
performed by it under the Poooling and Serviucing Agreements (the "Pooling
Agreements") relating to the above-referenced Certificates to CMI, hereby
certify that:

            (A) A review of the activities of CMI during the preceding calender
      year and of its performance as subservicer under the Subservicing
      Agreements and Poooling Agreements has been made under my supervision;
      and

            (B) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, CMI has
      fulfilled all of its obligations as subservicer under the Subservicing
      Agreements and Pooling Agreements thoughout the preceding calender year.


      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Certificate as of March 31, 1998.


               BY: /s/ Patsy M. Barker
                   -----------------------
               NAME: Patsy M. Barker
               TITLE: Vice President

<PAGE>


           CITICORP MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC.

Series     1992-12
           1992-13   1992-13A AND 1992-13B
           1992-14
           1992-15
           1992-16
           1992-17
           1992-18
           1992-19
           1993-1
           1993-3, 1993-FX AND 1993-HK
           1993-5
           1993-7
           1993-9
           1993-11, 1993-11FX AND 1993-11HK
           1993-13, 1993-13FX AND 1993-13HK
           1994-1
           1994-3
           1994-5
           1994-7
           1994-9
           1994-11
           1994-13
           1995-2, 1995-2P AND 1995-2D
           1995-3, 1995-3P AND 1995-3D
           1997-1, 1997-1P AND 1997-1D
           1997-3, 1997-3P AND 1997-3D
           1997-5, 1997-5P AND 1997-5D
           1997-7, 1997-7P AND 1997-7D

<PAGE>

           CITICORP MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC.

Series     1992-20, 1992-20FX AND 1992-20HK
           1993-2
           1993-4
           1993-6, 1993-6FX AND 1993-6HK
           1993-8, 1993-8FX AND 1993-8HK
           1993-10
           1993-12
           1993-14
           1994-2
           1994-4, 1994-FX AND 1994-4HK
           1994-6
           1994-8
           1994-10
           1994-12, 1994-12FX AND 1994-12HK
           1995-1, 1995-1P AND 1995-1D
           1996-1, 1996-1P AND 1996-1D
           1997-2, 1997-2P AND 1997-2D
           1997-4, 1997-4P AND 1997-4D
           1997-6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Kevin D. Hall

v. Civil No. 05-cv-381-JD

Cheshire County Department

of Corrections, Superintendent, et al.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

 Plaintiff has filed another request for injunctive relief. 

This request alleges that his current jailor, Albany County (New

York) Jail has returned mail to the state court because of an

unauthorized envelope, has refused to accept his pro se status,

has refused to let him use envelopes provided to him by the

Cheshire County House of Correction and/or by defense counsel in

this case, has retaliated against him, has threatened to send out

his legal materials and has denied him the means to respond to

this court and defense counsel. 

Plaintiff has been granted in forma pauperis and pro se

status in this case. His jailor is without right to deny it. 

The problem, of course, is: (1) the Albany County Jail is not a

party to this case; and (2) this court has no jurisdiction over

it. The court cannot enjoin a non-party over whom it has no

jurisdiction. A hearing is unnecessary. I recommend that the

Case 1:05-cv-00381-JD Document 58 Filed 02/06/07 Page 1 of 2
2

motion (document no. 54) be denied. 

Any objections to this report and recommendation must be

filed within ten (10) days of receipt of this notice. Failure to

file objections within the specified time waives the right to

appeal the district court’s order. See Unauthorized Practice of

Law Comm. v. Gordon, 979 F.2d 11, 13-14 (1st Cir. 1992);

United States v. Valencia-Copete, 792 F.2d 4, 6 (1st Cir. 1986). 

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: February 6, 2007

cc: Kevin D. Hall, pro se

 John A. Curran, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00381-JD Document 58 Filed 02/06/07 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We have issued our
report dated August 15, 2019, with respect to the financial statement of Smart Trust 440 contained in Amendment No. 1 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-231495) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned report in the Registration
Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm”.


 


			/s/ Grant Thornton LLP



 


Chicago, Illinois


August 15, 2019
Opinion issued January 9, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-23-00762-CV

———————————

JESSICA LYNN PARSONS, Appellant

V.

SHANE WILSON, Appellee

On Appeal from the 257th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2021-01949

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Jessica Lynn Parsons, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s 

August 23, 2023 “Order Dismissing [Appellant’s] Motions for Enforcement of 

Agreed Final Decree of Divorce.” Appellant has neither paid the required fees nor 

established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 20.1; 
2

see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.851(b), 51.941(a); Order, 

Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and 

Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 15-9158 

(Tex. Aug. 28, 2015). On November 9, 2023, appellant was notified that this appeal 

was subject to dismissal if appellate costs were not paid, or indigence was not 

established, by December 11, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c). Appellant did 

not adequately respond.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for nonpayment of all required fees. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c), 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Countiss, and Farris.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED W ILLIAM ERIC COONTZ , A ppellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 22

- 2191 LT Case No. 1994

- CF

- 347 STAT E OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decisio n filed November 1 , 2 022 3.850 A ppeal f rom th e Circuit Court for Citru s County , Richard A. Howard , J udge. William E. Coontz, Huttonsville, WV, pro se. No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED.

EVANDER , EDWARDS an d HARRIS , JJ., concur

.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Marine Polymer Technologies, Inc.

v. Civil No. 06-cv-100-JD

HemCon, Inc.

O R D E R

Marine Polymer Technologies, Inc. moves, in limine, to

preclude HemCon, Inc. from introducing evidence relating to its

enablement and natural product defenses. In support, Marine

Polymer asserts that the court previously ruled in Marine

Polymer’s favor on those defenses. HemCon objects, contending

that the defenses have not been resolved.

HemCon raised its enablement and natural product defenses in

support of its motion for summary judgment. The court denied the

motion on July 9, 2009. Dkt. no. 146. Although the court noted

that the specification enabled at least one mode of making and

using the invention, that determination merely established that

HemCon had not demonstrated for purposes of summary judgment that

the description of the invention was insufficient to meet the

requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112. Similarly, the court concluded

that HemCon had not shown, for purposes of summary judgment, that

the ‘245 patent covers products of nature. No order dismissed

Case 1:06-cv-00100-JD Document 254 Filed 03/30/10 Page 1 of 2
those defenses. Therefore, HemCon may introduce evidence in

support of these defenses at trial. 

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiff’s motion in limine

(document no. 196) is denied. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

March 30, 2010

cc: Julie M. Baher, Esquire

Garet K. Galster, Esquire

Daniel R. Johnson, Esquire

Heather E. Krans, Esquire

Joseph A. Kromholz, Esquire

Lynda Q. Nguyen, Esquire

Brian M. Poissant, Esquire

Daniel D. Ryan, Esquire

Ognian V. Shentov, Esquire

Jonathan M. Shirley, Esquire

Daniel E. Will, Esquire

Leigh S. Willey, Esquire

2

Case 1:06-cv-00100-JD Document 254 Filed 03/30/10 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 6, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 6936]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2119]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN: 0648-XF48


North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) 
Scallop Plan Team will meet in Anchorage, AK.

DATES: The meeting will be held on February 21, 2008, from 10 a.m. to 5 
p.m. and February 22, 2008, from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held a the Captain Cook Hotel, 939 W 5th 
Avenue, Club Room 2, 10th Floor, Anchorage, AK 99501
    Council address: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 
4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diana Stram, Council staff; telephone: 
(907) 271-2809.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The agenda will include: Elect officers and 
discuss additional membership needs; discussion of current and future 
scallop survey techniques; central region assessment techniques, plans 
and management; review Status of Statewide Scallop Stocks and compile 
SAFE Report; discussion of ageing techniques and documentation issues; 
discussion of economics of the scallop fishery; and review and revise 
research priorities.
    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come 
before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject 
of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to 
those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues 
arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action 
under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's 
intent to take final action to address the emergency.

Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Gail Bendixen at (907) 271-2809 at least 7 
working days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: February 1, 2008.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E8-2119 Filed 2-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Tania Gavrilovic

v. Case No. 05-cv-428-PB

Worldwide Language Resources, Inc.

ORDER

Re: Document No. 17, Motion for Reconsideration

of Order Relating to Recusal

Ruling: I accept counsel’s representation that Attorney

Donovan was not retained to force the magistrate judge’s recusal.

Nevertheless, I deny the Motion for Reconsideration because it

would be a waste of judicial resources to require the magistrate

judge’s recusal in a case on which he has done substantial work

simply to accommodate REEP’s desire to employ Attorney Donovan.

/s/ Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

District Judge

Date: April 17, 2006

cc: Jeffrey Meyers, Esq. 

Alexander Walker, Esq.

Robert McDaniel, Esq.

Thomas Donovan, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00428-PB Document 18 Filed 04/17/06 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.01
 
 OFFICER CERTIFICATION
 
 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 Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the SEC on the date hereof (Form 10-Q), each of the undersigned officers of PSCo certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officer’s knowledge:
 
 (1)
The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2)
The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PSCo as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Form 10-Q.
 
 Date: May 2, 2011
 
 /s/ DAVID L. EVESDavid L. EvesPresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ DAVID M. SPARBYDavid M. SparbyVice President and Chief Financial Officer
 
 The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to PSCo and will be retained by PSCo and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.
#### Dashrathabhai Manilal PATEL; Meghana Patel; Ronit Patel, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 02-60683.

Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

July 30, 2003.

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.*

Dashrathabhai Manilal Patel, a citizen of India, petitions for review of an order from the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision to deny his application for asylum or withholding of removal. Patel argues that the BIA "violated his Fifth Amendment rights by summarily affirming the decision of the IJ without examining the merits of Patel’s asylum claim. The court has held that the summary affirmance procedures do not violate due process and do not deprive the court of a basis for judicial review. *Soadjede v. Ashcroft,*324 F.3d 830, 832-33 (5th Cir.2003).

Patel argues that the BIA erred as a matter of law in affirming the I J’s decision without an opinion because the case does not meet the requirements for a summary affirmance. Because the decision of the IJ was correct and does not raise any substantial factual or legal questions on appeal, the decision met the criteria for a summary affirmance. *See 8*C.F.R. § 1003.1(a)(7)(ii).

Insofar as Patel challenges the validity of the agency’s decision, a review of the record reflects that the decision is supported by substantial evidence and that the evidence in the record does not compel a contrary conclusion. *See Ontunez-Tursios v. Ashcroft,*303 F.3d 341, 350 (5th Cir.2002); *Mikhael v. I.N.S.,*115 F.3d 299, 302 (5th Cir.1997). Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Zwicker v. NH State Prison, Warden Doc. 4

Dockets.Justia.com
Exhibit
32.1





Certification
of Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





C.W.
Gilluly, Chief Executive Officer of AMASYS Corporation (the “Company”) certifies
in his capacity as an officer of the Company that he has reviewed the Report of
the Company on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 and that to the
best of his knowledge:





1.
            the
      report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and





2.
            the
      information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





The
purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63, Section
1350 of the United States code, as amended by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or it staff upon request.





July
      23, 2008
            /s/ C.W.
      Gilluly,
      Ed.D.C.W.
      Gilluly, Ed.D.Chief
      Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-97-01/02-SM

Edward Cervantes Arias

and Jose Luis Alsina-Ortiz

O R D E R

The court construes Defendant Arias’ motion to continue the final pretrial

conference as a motion to continue the trial as well, which motion is granted 

(document 22). Trial has been rescheduled for the January 2007 trial period. 

Defendant Arias shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later than 

November 7, 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 defendants in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendants the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: December 15, 2006 at 4:00 p.m.

Jury Selection: January 9, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:06-cr-00097-SM Document 23 Filed 10/30/06 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

October 30, 2006

cc: Richard N. Foley, Esq.

Jose A. Espinosa, Esq.

Michael Sheehan, Esq.

Mark Zuckerman, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00097-SM Document 23 Filed 10/30/06 Page 2 of 2
PITTSBURGH & WEST VIRGINIA RAILROAD
                              FORM 10-Q
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION

(Dollars in Thousands)

                                                     Unaudited
                                                  Six months ended
                                                       June 30    

                                                  1997      1996
<S>                                               <C>       <C>
Source of Cash:
     Net income                                   $414      $411

     Decrease in accounts payable                   (6)       (3)

          Cash provided from operations           $408      $408


Use of Cash:

     Dividends paid                                408       408

     Increase (decrease) in cash                  $  -      $ (-)
</TABLE>

Notes:

     (1)  The foregoing interim financial statements are unaudited but, 
          in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments
          necessary for a fair presentation of the results of operations
          for the interim periods.

     (2)  Registrant has elected to be treated for tax purposes as a
          real estate investment trust. As such, the Trust is exempt
          from paying federal corporate income tax on any income that is
          distributed to shareholders. It has been Registrant's policy
          to distribute annually all of its ordinary taxable income.
          Consequently, no provision has been made for federal income
          tax.