alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61184-61185]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24489]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice of Reporting Requirements Submitted for OMB Review.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35), agencies are required to

[[Page 61185]]

submit proposed reporting and recordkeeping requirements to OMB for 
review and approval, and to publish a notice in the Federal Register 
notifying the public that the agency has made such a submission.

DATES: Submit comments on or before November 14, 2008. If you intend to 
comment but cannot prepare comments promptly, please advise the OMB 
Reviewer and the Agency Clearance Officer before the deadline.
    Copies: Request for clearance (OMB 83-1), supporting statement, and 
other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from the 
Agency Clearance Officer.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments concerning this notice to: Agency 
Clearance Officer, Jacqueline White, Small Business Administration, 409 
3rd Street, SW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20416; and OMB Reviewer, 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline White, Agency Clearance 
Officer, (202) 205-7044.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Disaster Business Loan Application.
    SBA Form Numbers: 5 & 1368.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Description of Respondents: Application for benefits (loan) used to 
determine eligibility and credit worthiness of Small Business or not-
for-profit organizations who seek Federal assistance in a declared 
disaster. Respondents are disaster victims seeking disaster assistance.
    Responses: 9,510.
    Annual Burden: 22,208.
    Title: Disaster Business Loan Application.
    SBA Form Number: 5C.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Description of Respondents: Application for benefits (loan) used to 
determine eligibility and credit worthiness of Small Business or not-
for-profit organizations who seek Federal assistance in a declared 
disaster. Respondents are disaster victims seeking disaster assistance.
    Responses: 49,862.
    Annual Burden: 74,793.

Jacqueline White,
Chief, Administrative Information Branch.
[FR Doc. E8-24489 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-51222

Summary Calendar

 

MICHAELA RAE HOLLEY,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

STATE OF TEXAS,

Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-98-CV-311

- - - - - - - - - -

September 3, 1999

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Michaela Rae Holley, under indictment for murder, appeals

the district court’s denial of her petition for a writ of habeas

corpus. Because Holley has not been retried and convicted, the

correct basis for her habeas petition is 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

Holley argues that a retrial on this indictment is barred by

the Double Jeopardy Clause because her first trial ended in a

mistrial when a juror informed the state trial judge that he

recognized both her and the witness then on the stand for the 
No. 98-51222

-2-

state. The state trial court cited manifest necessity as the

reason for dismissing the juror and ordering a mistrial, both

over Holley’s objections. Once a trial court has declared a

mistrial on manifest necessity grounds, we, as the reviewing

court, are to give great deference to the trial court’s decision. 

Cherry v. Director, State Bd. of Corrections, 635 F.2d 414, 418

(5th Cir. 1981). When a sua sponte mistrial is declared for

juror bias, the decision should be upheld unless the trial judge

has acted irrationally or irresponsibly. Arizona v. Washington,

434 U.S. 497, 514 (1977). 

The district court rejected Holley’s double jeopardy claim

because it found that “there is nothing to indicate that the

trial judge ... acted either irrationally or irresponsibly.” The

district court’s finding is supported by the record and Holley

has not presented any evidence that meets the standard of review. 

See Baker v. Metcalfe, 633 F.2d 1198, 1201 (5th Cir. 1981);

United States v. Gonzalez, 76 F.3d 1339, 1342 (5th Cir. 1996). 

Holley also argues that the state trial court misapplied

Texas state law when it determined that a mistrial was necessary

because the trial could not continue with eleven jurors, as

requested by Holley. The Texas Tenth Court of Appeals held that

the state trial court correctly applied the Texas law in force at

the time it declared the mistrial. Federal habeas courts are not

super state supreme courts. Cronnon v. Alabama, 587 F.2d 246,

250 (5th Cir. 1979). Once a state has interpreted its own law,

the federal habeas court will accept that interpretation. Seaton

v. Procunier, 750 F.2d 366, 368 (5th Cir. 1985).
No. 98-51222

-3-

The district court’s use of § 2254 instead of § 2241 to

decide the merits of Holley’s habeas petition was harmless error

because a review of the record applying the standards of § 2241

produces the same results. Accordingly, the dismissal of

Holley’s habeas corpus petition is AFFIRMED. 

AFFIRMED.
#### Mark P. JOHNSON, Appellant, v. Otto MANWARREN, Respondent.

No. 25392.

Kansas City Court of Appeals, Missouri.

Dec. 6, 1971.

*343Galen Knowlton and Michael J. Drape, of Knowlton & Drape, Kansas City, for appellant.

Norman O. Sanders and C. Thomas Carr, of Sheridan, Sanders, Carr & White, Kansas City, for respondent.

HOWARD, Judge.

This is a damage suit growing out of an automobile collision which occurred in the vicinity of 75th and Wornall in Kansas City, Missouri. The automobile driven by defendant crashed into the rearend of the automobile driven by plaintiff when both were proceeding in a northerly direction on Wornall. In view of the issues presented and the disposition made thereof, no factual statement is required.

At the conclusion of a jury trial, the plaintiff submitted his cause on the rear-end doctrine and the defendant submitted an instruction on contributory negligence requiring the jury to find that “plaintiff suddenly stopped his automobile on the highway without first giving an adequate and timely warning of his intention to stop.” The jury returned a verdict for defendant and plaintiff has duly appealed to this court.

Plaintiff’s brief in this court presented only one issue. His one “Points and Authorities” reads in its entirety as follows: “The Court Erred In Giving Defendant’s Instruction No. 7.” This “Point” does not attempt in any manner to advise the court the reasons why the giving of such instruction was erroneous. Because of this failure, the plaintiff is in complete and absolute violation of Civil Rule 83.05(e), V.A.M.R. This rule requires that “The points relied on shall briefly and concisely state what actions or rulings of the Court are claimed to be erroneous and briefly and concisely state *why it is contended the Court was wrong*in any action or ruling sought to be reviewed.” (Emphasis added) The point set out in plaintiff’s brief wholly fails to state “why it is contended the Court was wrong.” Because of this omission, this point presents nothing for our review. The appellate courts of this state have so held repeatedly and over an extended period of time. See, among the many cases, Meierotto v. Thompson, 356 Mo. 32, 201 S.W.2d 161; Ambrose v. M.F.A. Co-operative Ass’n, Mo., 266 S.W.2d 647; Norman v. Jefferson City Coca-Cola Bottling Co., Mo.App., 211 S.W.2d 552; E. A. Mabes and Company v. Fishman, Mo.App., 284 S.W.2d 21; and Lewis v. Watkins, Mo.App., 297 S.W.2d 595. Because nothing is preserved for our review, this appeal must be dismissed.

In the argument portion of his brief plaintiff contends that there was no evidence to support the requirement of Instruction No. 7 that the jury find as a prerequisite to a verdict for defendant that the plaintiff failed to give an “adequate and timely warning of his intention to stop.” We have gratuitously examined the record and have determined that this contention is without merit. The defendant’s testimony gave adequate support for the giving of this phase of the instruction and for the jury’s finding in accordance therewith.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

All concur.
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.1
 ESPP Plan Description  United States
 SYBASE, INC.
1991 AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
(As amended on October 25, 2006)




---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 



(i)
    
    increase the number of shares reserved for purchase under the Plan; or(ii)
    
    require shareholder approval in order to comply with SEC Rule 16b-3.




---



##### 



By:
    
    DANIEL R. CARLIts:
    
    Vice President, GeneralCounsel and SecretaryDate:
    
    October 25, 2006
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



The undersigned hereby certifies that the Form 10-K Annual Report of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Silver Legacy
Capital Corp. (collectively, the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2003 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  |                                                                                                              
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: March 24, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /S/    BRUCE C.
SEXTON
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | Bruce C. Sexton, Chief Financial Officer of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Silver Legacy Capital
Corp.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02337-REB-MJW

TYRON DUANTE SMALL,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

JOHN DOE DETECTIVE ONE, and

JOHN DOE OFFICER TWO,

Defendant(s).

MINUTE ORDER 

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that the Pro Se Incarcerated Plaintiff’s Motion Requesting

An Settlement Conference (docket no. 28) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE at this

time. There are no specifically named defendants that have been served with process

at this time. The Complaint names defendants John Doe Detective and John Doe

Officer Two only. Accordingly, it is FURTHER ORDERED that a Telephone Status

Conference is set before Magistrate Judge Watanabe on March 6, 2012, at 9:30 a.m., in

Courtroom A-502, Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver,

Colorado, 80294. The Pro Se Incarcerated Plaintiff shall contact this court at 303-844-

2403 on March 6, 2012, at 9:30 a.m. At this telephone Status Conference, the Pro Se

Incarcerated Plaintiff shall be prepared to inform this court of the specific names

defendants John Doe Detective and John Doe Officer Two and addresses where they

can be served with process.

Date: February 13, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02337-REB-MJW Document 29 Filed 02/13/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF
J. ROE BUCKLEY/CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
OF MEWBOURNE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 I, J. Roe Buckley, Chief Financial Officer of Mewbourne Development
Corporation, Managing General Partner of Mewbourne Energy Partners
03-A, L. P.,
(the Registrant), hereby certify that the accompanying
report on Form 10-K,
for the annual period ended December 31, 2003 and filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof pursuant to Section 13 (a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Report) by the Registrant fully complies
with the requirements of that section. I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Registrant. /s/ J. Roe BuckelyName: J. Roe BuckelyDate: March 29, 2004
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATION**





In
      connection with the periodic report of Energroup
      Holdings Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Wang Shu, Chief Financial
      Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of the Company, hereby
      certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,
      Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my
      knowledge:




(1)  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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 at the dates
      and for the periods indicated.





Date:    May
                20, 2008
            
            /s/
                Wang ShuWang
                ShuChief
                Financial Officer(Principal
                Financial and Accounting Officer)
-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02307-WYD-KMT

JULIO ALVAREZ-CORTEZ;

LORENZA MORALES-ALVAREZ, individually and as next friend of H G-T, a minor and

V G-T, a minor; and

EMMANUEL RUIZ,

Plaintiffs,

v.

LOU VALLARIO, Garfield County Sheriff, in his individual capacity;

DOES 1-3, Garfield County deputy sheriffs, in their individual capacities;

STEVE TURZA, an ICE agent, in his individual capacity; and

CHRIS CARTER, an ICE agent, in his individual capacity,

Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER 

ORDER ENTERED BY CHIEF JUDGE WILEY Y. DANIEL

Based on the filing of the First Amended Complaint on March 15, 2012 [ECF No.

46], Defendant Lou Vallario’s Motion to Dismiss filed October 31, 2011 [ECF No. 16],

and Defendants Carter and Turza’s Motion to Dismiss filed December 23, 2011 [ECF

No. 30] DENIED AS MOOT. 

Dated: March 16, 2012.

Case 1:11-cv-02307-WYD-KMT Document 47 Filed 03/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 14, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 60714]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24259]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[LLOR9360000.L51040000.FI0000-09; HAG-09-0007; WAOR58372 and WAOR58373]


Notice of Proposed Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas Leases 
WAOR58372 and WAOR58373; Washington

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of 30 U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR 
3108.2-3(a) and (b)(1), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received a 
petition for reinstatement from Delta Petroleum Corporation for 
competitive oil and gas leases WAOR58372 and WAOR58373, for lands in 
Franklin County, Washington. The petition was filed on time and was 
accompanied by all the rentals due since the date the leases terminated 
under the law.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The lessee, Delta Petroleum Corporation, has 
agreed to the amended lease terms for rentals and royalties at rates of 
$10.00 per acre or fraction thereof, per year and 16-2/3 percent, 
respectively. The lessee has paid the required $500 administrative fee 
and $163 to reimburse the Bureau of Land Management for the cost of 
this Federal Register notice.
    The lessee has met all the requirements for reinstatement of the 
leases as set out in Section 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Leasing Act 
of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188). Therefore, the Bureau of Land Management is 
proposing to reinstate leases WAOR58372 and WAOR58373, effective April 
1, 2008, subject to the original terms and conditions of the leases and 
the increased rental and royalty rates cited above. No other valid 
lease has been issued affecting the lands.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Reed, Land Law Examiner, 
Minerals Section, BLM Oregon/Washington State Office, PO Box 2965, 
Portland, Oregon 97208, (503) 808-6282, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#387551535d676a5d5d5c78574a165a5455165f574e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a3eecac8c6fcf1c6c6c7e3ccd18dc1cfce8dc4ccd5">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: October 7, 2008.
Christopher B. DeWitt,
Chief, Minerals Section.
[FR Doc. E8-24259 Filed 10-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-33-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[No. 34963.

Department Two.

February 26, 1959.]

#### *In the Matter of the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus of*Luke Pope, *Petitioner,*v. B. J. Rhay, *as Superintendent of the State Penitentiary, Respondent.*
      *1*

*Luke Pope, pro se.*

*The Attorney General, Stephen C. Way*and *M. Lawrence Ross, Assistants,*for respondent.

Reported in 335 P. (2d) 805.

Per Curiam.

The petitioner pleaded guilty to the crime of riding in a motor vehicle taken without the permission of the owner, in violation of RCW 9.54.020. The trial court entered judgment and sentence that the petitioner be imprisoned for a period of not more than twenty years.

For the reasons indicated in *In re Klapproth v. Squier,*50 Wn. (2d) 675, 314 P. (2d) 430 (1957), and in *In re Richey v. Squier,*51 Wn. (2d) 38, 315 P. (2d) 638 (1957), it is necessary to correct the sentence pronounced by changing the maximum from twenty to ten years, as provided by RCW 9.92.010.

The respondent is directed to produce the petitioner in the court where he was convicted and where judgment and sentence were pronounced; and that court is directed to impose a corrected sentence, as indicated in this opinion and in the cases cited^
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 4197

_____________________________
N IRAV P ATEL , M AHENDRA P ATEL and ARRR T RUCK S TOP , LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company
, Appellant s ,

v.

H AMILTON , LLC, a Florid a Limited Liability Company
, H ARRISON P LUMBING , I NC ., a Florida Corporation,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Holmes County

. Timothy Register , Judge

. May 23, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. W OLF , B ILBREY , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Kerry Adkison of Kerry Adkison, P.A., Chipley
, for Appellant s

.
Michael Wm Mead of Mead Law Firm, Fort Walton Beach
, for Appellee.
#### Paysoff TINKOFF, Appellant, v. John J. RYAN, Superintendent, United States Detention Farm, Milan, Michigan, Appellee.

No. 7865.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Dec. 9, 1937.

For opinion below, see 21 F.Supp. 185.

Tyrell A. Richardson, of Chicago, 111., for appellant.

John C. Lehr and Carl R. Perkins, both of Detroit, Mich., for appellee.

Before MOORMAN, HICKS, and SIMONS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

It is ordered that the petition of appellant to extend time to file answer to the appellee’s motion to dismiss be, and the same is hereby, denied.

It is ordered that the motion of appellant for leave to file petition for contempt *1018against the respondent, John J. Ryan, and John E. Murtagh, assistant superintendent of the United States Detention Farm, Milan, Mich., be, and the same is hereby, denied.

It is ordered that the motion of the appellee to extend the time within which to file an answer to the petition for contempt be, and the same is hereby, denied.

It is ordered that the appellant’s motion for leave to file certain papers with this court, which were considered by the Honorable James C. McReynolds, Justice of the United States Supreme Court, be, and the same is hereby, denied.

On consideration of the motion of the appellee to dismiss this appeal for the reason that any questions tendered therein have now become moot, by reason of the release of the appellant from custody by the appellee because of completion of the sentence imposed upon the appellant, it is ordered that the appeal be, and the same is hereby, dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 61091]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24497]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Availability for Non-Exclusive, Exclusive, or Partially Exclusive 
Licensing of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Concerning Intraoral 
Measurement of Saliva Osmolarity to Measure Hydration Status

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with 37 CFR 404.6 and 404.7, announcement is 
made of the availability for licensing of the invention set forth in 
U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 61/096,941 entitled 
``Intraoral Measurement of Saliva Osmolarity to Measure Hydration 
Status,'' filed September 15, 2008. The United States Government, as 
represented by the Secretary of the Army, has rights in this invention.

ADDRESSES: Commander, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, 
ATTN: Command Judge Advocate, MCMR-JA, 504 Scott Street, Fort Detrick, 
Frederick, MD 21702-5012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For patent issues, Ms. Elizabeth 
Arwine, Patent Attorney, (301) 619-7808. For licensing issues, Dr. Paul 
Mele, Office of Research & Technology Assessment, (301) 619-6664, both 
at telefax (301) 619-5034.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The invention comprises a rapid, non-
invasive method that uses saliva to determine and/or monitor a 
subject's hydration level for diagnostic, treatment, and prophylactic 
purposes. By determining/monitoring the hydration status of a subject, 
preventive measures may be applied to prevent heat injuries and deaths.

Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-24497 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-P