alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 193 (Friday, October 3, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 57619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23316]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EF08-3022-000]


Southeastern Power Administration; Notice of Filing

September 25, 2008.
    Take notice that on September 16, 2008, the Deputy Secretary, U.S. 
Department of Energy, pursuant to the authority vested on the Deputy 
Secretary by the Department of Energy's Delegation Order Nos. 00-
001.00C and 00-037.00, and by sections 301(b) and 302(a) of the 
Department of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95091), submitted to the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, pursuant to the authority vested 
by Delegation Order No. 00-37.00, for confirmation and approval on a 
final basis, Rate Schedules CBR-1-G, CSI-1-G, CEK-1-G, CM-1-G, CC-1-G, 
CC-1-H, CK-1-G, CTV-1-G, and Replacement-3, effective October 1, 2008 
through September 30, 2013.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or 
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6c2a293e2f2302000502093f191c1c031e182c0a091e0f420b031a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="561013041519383a3f383305232626392422163033243578313920">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 16, 2008.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-23316 Filed 10-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<Page>

                                                                    Exhibit 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

        I, Stephen D. Rubin, the President of Vita Food Products, Inc., certify
        that:

1.      I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Vita Food
        Products, Inc.;

2.      Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report.

3.      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4.      The registrant's other certifying officers 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 we 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 quarterly 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 quarterly report based on such evaluation; and

c)      Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
most recent fiscal quarter 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 officers 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 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:   May 14, 2004

By:     /s/ Stephen D. Rubin
    --------------------------------
            Stephen D. Rubin
               PRESIDENT
     (PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

                                       17
#### Leonard BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. L. DIGGS, Correctional Captain; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-16334.

D.C. No. CV-99-00019-DFL.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 13, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Leonard Brown appeals pro se the summary judgment in favor of prison defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging denial of due process, deliberate indifference to his safety, and retaliation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo summary judgment, *Delta Sav. Bank v. United States,*265 F.3d 1017, 1021 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.

Contrary to Brown’s contention, the district court correctly applied the standard set forth in *Sandin v. Conner,*515 U.S. 472, 115 S.Ct. 2293, 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995). Whether or not defendant Hargrove violated state regulations or prison policy in transferring Brown to High Desert State Prison (“HDSP”), the transfer from one prison to another does not give rise to due process rights. *See id.*at 484, 115 S.Ct. 2293 (liberty interests protected by due process limited to freedom from restraint that “imposes atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to ordinary incidents of prison life”); *see, e.g., Meachum v. Fano,*427 U.S. 215, 225, 96 S.Ct. 2532, 49 L.Ed.2d 451 (1976) (transfer from one prison to another was “within the normal limits or range of custody which the conviction has authorized the State to impose”).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Brown’s deliberate indifference to safety claim because Brown failed to present evidence showing that Hargrove knew that transfer to HDSP posed a substantial risk of serious harm to Brown or, later, that Diggs, Baughman, or Reyes knew that staying at HDSP posed a *353substantial risk of serious harm to Brown. *See Farmer v. Brennan,*511 U.S. 825, 847, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Brown’s retaliation claim against Reyes because Brown presented insufficient evidence of retaliatory intent. *See Crawford-El v. Britton,*523 U.S. 574, 600, 118 S.Ct. 1584, 140 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998) (at summary judgment, a plaintiff “must identify affirmative evidence from which a jury could find that the plaintiff has carried his or her burden of proving the pertinent motive”).

Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying appointment of counsel because Brown failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. *See Rand v. Rowland,*113 F.3d 1520,1525 (9th Cir.1997).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, David Peterschmidt, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Inktomi Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30,
2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Inktomi Corporation.

                                          By:  /s/ David Peterschmidt
                                              __________________________________
                                          Name:  David Peterschmidt
                                          Title: Chief Executive Officer

I, Randy Gottfried, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Inktomi Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30,
2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Inktomi Corporation.

                                          By:   /s/ Randy Gottfried
                                              __________________________________
                                          Name:  Randy Gottfried
                                          Title: Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 27 (Friday, February 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 7613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2291]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT


Comment Request for Review of a Revised Information Collection: 
OPM Online Form 1417

AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. 
L. 104-13, May 22, 1995), this notice announces that the Office of 
Personnel Management (OPM) intends to submit to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) a request for clearance of a revised 
information collection. OPM Online Form 1417, the Combined Federal 
Campaign (CFC) Information System form, collects information from the 
277 local CFC campaigns to verify campaign results and collect contact 
information. Revisions to the form include clarifying edits to items 
numbered 2-6, 9 and 10 of the Campaign Results Total Page, the 
elimination of questions numbered 13-15 of the Campaign Results Total 
Page and the return of one question edited to collect pledge amounts 
designated specifically for federal emergency or disaster relief, if 
any, on the Campaign Results Total Page.
    We estimate 277 Online OPM Forms 1417 are completed annually. Each 
form takes approximately 20 minutes to complete. The annual estimated 
burden is 101 hours.
    Comments are particularly invited on: Whether this information is 
necessary for the proper performance of functions of the Office of 
Personnel Management, and whether it will have practical utility; 
whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of 
information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and 
methodology; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the 
collection of information on those who are to respond, through the 
appropriate use of technological collection techniques or other forms 
of information technology.
    For copies of this proposal, contact Mary Beth Smith-Toomey on 
(202) 606-8358, FAX (202) 418-3251 or E-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#701d12041f1f1d1509301f001d5e171f06"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3c515e4853535159457c534c51125b534a">[email protected]</span></a>. 
Please be sure to include a mailing address with your request.

DATES: Comments on this proposal should be received within 60 calendar 
days from the date of this publication.

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to--Cherlynn Stevens, Office of the 
Combined Federal Campaign, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E 
Street, NW., Room 5450, Washington, DC 20415.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
Howard Weizmann,
Deputy Director.
 [FR Doc. E8-2291 Filed 2-7-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-46-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 194 (Monday, October 6, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 58291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23466]


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

 SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[License No. 09/79-0454]


Emergence Capital Partners SBIC, L.P.; Notice Seeking Exemption 
Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of 
Interest

    Notice is hereby given that Horizon Ventures Fund II, L.P., 4 Main 
Street, Suite 50, Los Altos, CA 94022, a Federal Licensee under the 
Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (``the Act''), in 
connection with the financing of a small concern, has sought an 
exemption under Section 312 of the Act and Section 107.730, Financings 
which Constitute Conflicts of Interest of the Small Business 
Administration (``SBA'') Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). 
Horizon Ventures Fund II, L.P. proposes to provide equity/debt security 
financing to Invivodata, Inc., 2100 Wharton Street, Suite 505, 
Pittsburgh, PA 15203.
    The financing is brought within the purview of Sec.  107.730(a)(1) 
of the Regulations because Horizon Ventures Fund I, L.P. and Horizon 
Ventures Advisors Fund I, L.P., both Associates of Horizon Ventures 
Fund II, L.P., own in the aggregate more than ten percent of 
Invivodata, Inc. Therefore this transaction is considered a financing 
of an Associate requiring prior SBA approval.
    Notice is hereby given that any interested person may submit 
written comments on the transaction within fifteen days of the date of 
this publication to the Associate Administrator for Investment, U.S. 
Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20416.

    Dated: September 23, 2008.
A. Joseph Shepard,
Associate Administrator for Investment.
 [FR Doc. E8-23466 Filed 10-3-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
EXHIBIT 99.1
                                                                    ------------

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION
                      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Quarterly
Report  on  Form  10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2002 fully complies with
the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934,  as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents,
in  all  material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the  Company.

This  13th  day  of  August,  2002.

/S/  JUDY B. TURNER
-------------------
Judy B. Turner
President, Chief Executive Officer and
Principal Financial and Accounting Officer


                                      -17-
<PAGE>
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 868 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     February 12, 2008.
Whereas Congressman William Kent of California recognized the transcendent 
        beauty and national significance of the coastal redwood trees and he set 
        aside his private land for future generations;
Whereas Congressman Kent donated his lands to be known as Muir Woods in the 
        State of California as the first National monument, presenting them to 
        the United States Government as a gift to the people of the United 
        States;
Whereas Muir Woods provides a keystone for conservation stewardship and a rich 
        natural laboratory to explore the philosophy of its namesake, the 
        admired conservation activist John Muir;
Whereas Muir Woods was recognized 100 years ago to be ``of extraordinary 
        scientific interest and importance because of the primeval character of 
        the forest and the character, age and size of the trees'';
Whereas the Kent donation made it possible for President Theodore Roosevelt to 
        exercise one of the Nation's most unique preservation tools, the 
        Antiquities Act, by declaring Muir Woods National Monument for the 
        American people;
Whereas Muir Woods National Monument is preserved today through the dedicated 
        staff and volunteers of the National Park Service;
Whereas on May 19, 1945 international delegates to the historic Charter 
        Convention of the United Nations met in the beauty and peace of Muir 
        Wood's Cathedral Grove to open the convention and honor the memory of 
        the late President Franklin D. Roosevelt; and
Whereas in 1972 Muir Woods National Monument became part of the Golden Gate 
        National Recreation Area and today attracts up to a million visitors 
        annually: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the United States House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the foresight of President Roosevelt in using the 
        Antiquities Act in declaring Muir Woods National Monument;
            (2) recognizes the 100 years of careful preservation of America's 
        Coastal Redwood forest within Muir Woods National Monument; and
            (3) recognizes the natural and historical importance of the Muir 
        Woods National Monument in the State of California and to the Nation.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1220 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1220

  To increase the standard mileage rate for use of an automobile for 
     business, medical, and moving deduction purposes for 2007 and 
permanently increase such rate for charitable deduction purposes under 
   the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and to temporarily increase the 
   reimbursement rate for use of an automobile by Federal employees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 25, 2007

  Mr. Schumer introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To increase the standard mileage rate for use of an automobile for 
     business, medical, and moving deduction purposes for 2007 and 
permanently increase such rate for charitable deduction purposes under 
   the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and to temporarily increase the 
   reimbursement rate for use of an automobile by Federal employees.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Reimbursing Our American Drivers 
(ROAD) Act of 2007''.

SEC. 2. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN MILEAGE RATE DEDUCTION.

    (a) Rate for Business, Medical, and Moving Use of an Automobile.--
For purposes of sections 162(a), 213(d)(1)(B), and 217 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986, the standard mileage rate for use of an 
automobile shall be 60 cents per mile for any use after December 31, 
2006, and before January 1, 2008.
    (b) Rate for Charitable Use of an Automobile.--Section 170(i) of 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``14 cents'' 
and inserting ``30 cents''.

SEC. 3. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN REIMBURSEMENT RATE FOR USE OF AN 
              AUTOMOBILE FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.

    For purposes of section 5704 of title 5, United States Code, the 
standard mileage rate for use of an automobile for an employee who is 
engaged on official business for the Government shall be 60 cents per 
mile for any use after December 31, 2006, and before January 1, 2008.
                                 <all>
```
1 “[#34]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific

paper by the court’s electronic case filing and management system (CM/ECF). I use this convention

throughout this order.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Civil Case No. 11-cv-02380-REB-MJW

BRIAN C. COOK,

Plaintiff,

v.

BALL CORPORATION,

Defendant.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Blackburn, J.

The matter is before the court on the Joint Stipulation For Dismissal With

Prejudice [#34]1 filed August 21, 2012. After reviewing the stipulation and the record, I

conclude that the stipulation should be approved and that this action should be

dismissed with prejudice.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That the Joint Stipulation For Dismissal With Prejudice [#34] filed August

21, 2012, is APPROVED;

2. That the Trial Preparation Conference set for November 16, 2012, is

VACATED;

3. That the jury trial set to commence December 3, 2012, is VACATED; and

Case 1:11-cv-02380-REB-MJW Document 35 Filed 08/21/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

4. That this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE with the parties to pay

their own attorney fees and costs. 

Dated August 21, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

Case 1:11-cv-02380-REB-MJW Document 35 Filed 08/21/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2