alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

FEMA gives notice that the countywide per capita impact indicator under the Public Assistance program for disasters declared on or after October 1, 2008, will be increased.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         October 1, 2008, and applies to major disasters declared on or after October 1, 2008.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        James A. Walke, Disaster Assistance                               ( print page 60303)                            Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3834.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Response and Recovery Directorate Policy No. 9122.1 provides that FEMA will adjust the countywide per capita impact indicator under the Public Assistance program to reflect annual changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Department of Labor.

FEMA gives notice of an increase in the countywide per capita impact indicator to $3.28 for all disasters declared on or after October 1, 2008.

FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers of 5.4 percent for the 12-month period ended in August 2008. The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor released the information on September 16, 2008. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Public Assistance Grants.

R. David Paulison,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

 [FR Doc. E8-24064 Filed 10-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7037
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LARRY L. STEWART, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., District Judge. (CR-92-174) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Larry L. Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Harvey Lee Bryant, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion for a new trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Stewart , No. CR-92-174 (E.D. Va. June 10, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
| Skip to Content*Release Date: September 16, 2004*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.208 Open Market Paper** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

October 2, 2012

Order 

October 2, 2012

143831(49)(50)(52) 

BECKIE PRICE,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

SC: 143831

v COA: 298460

Clinton CC: 08-010387-NO

HIGH POINTE OIL COMPANY, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant. 

___________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by defendant-appellant for extension to 

August 22, 2012 of the time for filing its reply brief is granted. Motions by the Michigan 

Association of Home Builders and the Michigan Association of Realtors for leave to file 

briefs amicus curiae are considered and they are granted.
1 In The


### Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________
NO. 09

- 12

- 00235

- CR



### ____________________

KEVIN WADE LUMAN , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

____________________________________________________________________ _

On A ppeal from the 258th District Court Polk County, Texas Trial Cause No

. 17516

____________________________________________________________________ _

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Kevin Wade Luman pleaded guilty to the

attempted manufacture of a controlled substance . The trial court found Luman guilty,

suspended imposition of sentence, and placed Luman on community supervision for ten

years. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Luman ’s community supervision.

Luman pleaded “true” to violating three conditions of his community supervision. The

trial court found that Luman violated the condition s of his community supervision,

revoked Luman’s community supervision, and sentenced Luman to s even years in prison

.2 Luman ’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional

evaluation of the record and concludes Luman ’s appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.

California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); High v. State , 573

S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On September 20, 2012 , we granted an extension

of time for Luman to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Luman . We have

determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently examined the

clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and we agree that no arguable issues support an

appeal. We therefore find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re

- brief

the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1

AFFIRMED.

________________________________ STEVE Mc KEITHEN Chief Justice

Submitted on December 28, 2012 Opinion Delivered January 23, 2013 Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton , JJ.

1 Luman may challenge our decision by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
1 “[#15]” 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-02583-REB-MEH

WADE A. WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARD J. BOUDREAU & ASSOCIATES, LLC,

Defendant.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Blackburn, J.

The matter is before me on the Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice [#15]1

filed February 21, 2012. After reviewing the stipulation and the file, 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 Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice [#15] filed February 21,

2012, is APPROVED;

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

VACATED;

3. That the jury trial set to commence November 26, 2012, is VACATED; and

Case 1:11-cv-02583-REB-MEH Document 16 Filed 02/22/12 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 February 22, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

Case 1:11-cv-02583-REB-MEH Document 16 Filed 02/22/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02503-BNB

JAMES DENMAN,

Applicant,

v.

THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, and 

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO,

Respondents.

ORDER TO FILE PRE-ANSWER RESPONSE

As part of the preliminary consideration of the Amended Application for a Writ of

Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed on September 23, 2011, in this action

and pursuant to Denson v. Abbott, 554 F. Supp. 2d 1206 (D. Colo. 2008), the Court has

determined that a limited Pre-Answer Response is appropriate. Respondents are directed

pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District

Courts to file a Pre-Answer Response limited to addressing the affirmative defenses of

timeliness under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and/or exhaustion of state court remedies under 28

U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A). If Respondents do not intend to raise either of these affirmative

defenses, they must notify the Court of that decision in the Pre-Answer Response.

Respondents may not file a dispositive motion as their Pre-Answer Response, or an

Answer, or otherwise address the merits of the claims in response to this Order.

 In support of the Pre-Answer Response, Respondents should attach as exhibits all

relevant portions of the state court record, including but not limited to copies of all

Case 1:11-cv-02503-LTB Document 9 Filed 11/02/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
documents demonstrating whether this action is filed in a timely manner and/or whether

Applicant has exhausted state court remedies.

Applicant may reply to the Pre-Answer Response and provide any information that

might be relevant to the one-year limitation period under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and/or the

exhaustion of state court remedies. Applicant also should include information relevant to

equitable tolling, specifically as to whether he has pursued his claims diligently and whether

some extraordinary circumstance prevented him from filing a timely 28 U.S.C. § 2254

action in this Court. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order

Respondents shall file a Pre-Answer Response that complies with this Order. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days of the filing of the PreAnswer Response Applicant may file a Reply, if he desires. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that if Respondents do not intend to raise either of the

affirmative defenses of timeliness or exhaustion of state court remedies, they must notify

the Court of that decision in the Pre-Answer Response.

DATED November 2, 2011, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Boyd N. Boland 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02503-LTB Document 9 Filed 11/02/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. Crim. No. 11-359-JAP

MEONAHAN SCOTT PRAIRIECHIEF,

Defendant.

ORDER

Defendant Meonahan Scott Prairiechief filed a MOTION TO CONTINUE STATUS

CONFERENCE (Doc. No. 24) (Motion to Continue) on November 10, 2011. Defendant

Prairiechief asks the Court to vacate and reset the pretrial status conference presently set for

December 16, 2011, at 2:00 p.m. in Durango, Colorado because defense counsel will be engaged

in a trial in Denver, Colorado on that date. On November 28, 2011, the Court held a telephone

conference, on the record, to discuss Defendant Prairiechief’s Motion to Continue. Assistant

United States Attorney Dondi Osborne appeared on behalf of the Government. Attorney Robert

Pepin appeared on behalf of Defendant Prairiechief.

The Court has considered Defendant Prairiechief’s Motion to Continue and concludes

that the Motion to Continue should be granted. Accordingly, the December 16, 2011, pretrial

status conference will be vacated and reset for Wednesday, January 4, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. in

Room 235 of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado at 103 Sheppard Drive,

Durango, Colorado, 81303. 

On November 10, 2011, in addition to the Motion to Continue, Defendant Prairiechief

filed a MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT (Doc. No. 26) (Motion to Suppress) and a

MOTION FOR PRETRIAL NOTICE OF 404(b) EVIDENCE (Doc. No. 25) (404(b) Motion).

Case 1:11-cr-00359-JAP Document 33 Filed 11/30/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
On November 21, 2011, the Government filed the UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE TO

DEFENDANT MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT (Doc. No. 28) and the

GOVERNMENT’S NOTICE OF INTENT TO OFFER INTRINSIC EVIDENCE AND

EVIDENCE OF OTHER CRIMES, WRONGS OR ACTS PURSUANT TO FED. R. EVID.

404(b) AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION (Doc. No. 29) (Notice of Intent to

Offer 404(b) Evidence).

At the January 4, 2012, pretrial status conference the Court will set a deadline for

Defendant Prairiechief to respond to the Government’s Notice of Intent to Offer 404(b)

Evidence. Additionally, at the January 4, 2012, status conference the Court will schedule a

hearing on Defendant Prairiechief’s Motion to Suppress, Defendant Prairiechief’s 404(b)

Motion, and the Government’s Notice of Intent to Offer 404(b) Evidence.

IT IS ORDERED THAT (1) Defendant Meonahan Scott Prairiechief’s MOTION TO

CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE (Doc. No. 24) is granted, (2) the December 16, 2011,

pretrial status conference is vacated, and (3) the pretrial status conference is reset for January 4,

2012, at 9:00 a.m. in Durango, Colorado.

________________________________________________

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cr-00359-JAP Document 33 Filed 11/30/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 97-1778WM

_____________ Rex W. Carlson, individually and as * Next Friend for; Karen Virginia Carlson; * Erin Elizabeth Carlson; Dale Eugene * Carlson; David Paul Carlson; Wendy * Laura Carlson; Melissa Carlson Green, * * Plaintiffs-Appellants, * * v. * * Midway R-I School District; Janice * Larson, Individually, and in her capacity * as Superintendent of Midway R-I School * District; Laurie Thomas, Individually, * Appeal from the United States and In Her Capacity as a Member of * District Court for the Western the School Board; Richard Farr, * District of Missouri. Individually, and in his capacity as a * Member of the School Board; Terry * [UNPUBLISHED] Carter, Individually, and in his capacity * as a Member of the School Board; * * Defendants-Appellees, * * Bill Potts, Individually, and as a * Member of the School Board; * * Defendant, * * Roy M. Beaman, Individually, and in * his capacity as a Member of the School * Board; Ronnie D. Jones, Sr., *-2-

individually, and in his capacity as a * member of the School Board; Patricia * Shade, Individually, and as an Employee * of Midway R-I School District; * * Defendants-Appellees, * * Robert Weltsch, Individually, and as an * Employee of Midway R-I School * District; *

Defendant, * * Elvin S. Douglas, Jr.; * * Defendant-Appellee, * * Judy Long, Individually, and as an * employee of Midway R-I School * District, * * Defendant-Appellee. *

_____________ Submitted: December 8, 1997

Filed: December 16, 1997

_____________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. RexW. Carlson, individually and as next friend for his children, appeals from th e adverse decisions of the judge and the jury in this civil rights lawsuit. We rejec t Carlson's contention that the district court improperly granted summary judgment o n the children's claim for educational malpractice based on their right to an education-3-

under the Missouri constitution. We likewise reject Carlson's contention that th e district court misinstructed the jury on Carlson's claim for violations of the Firs t Amendment and retaliation. For the most part, Carlson failed to preserve his record for an appe al on the jury instructions that were given or refused by the district court, and having reviewed the challenged instructions under the appropriate standards of review, we conclud e the challenged instructions do not require reversal. Having considere d Carlson's remaining contentions under well-establishe d standards, we find no error that wouldrequire reversal. Because an opinion would have no precedential value, w e affirm the district court without further discussion. See8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.

Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
TAYLOR CAPITAL GROUP, INC.



Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.

Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Taylor Capital Group, Inc. (the Company) hereby certify that:



(i) the accompanying Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                         |  |  |  |                                          
|------------------------ |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------
|Dated: December 30, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ JEFFREY W. TAYLOR                    
|                         |  |  |  | Jeffrey W. Taylor Chief Executive
Officer
|                         |  | 
|Dated: December 30, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ DANIEL C. STEVENS                    
|                         |  |  |  | Daniel C. Stevens Chief Financial
Officer



This certification
accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
another 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 Taylor Capital Group, Inc. and
will be retained by Taylor Capital Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon request.
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 4.1


                     AMENDMENT TO THE BY-LAWS OF HARDINGE INC.

                               DATED FEBRUARY 22, 2000


     Effective April 1, 2000, the first sentence of Article III, Section 3, of
the By-Laws of Hardinge Inc. was amended to read:

     "THE NUMBER OF DIRECTORS CONSTITUTING THE ENTIRE BOARD SHALL BE EIGHT (8)."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   10-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                OCT-6-1996
<CASH>                                          83,905
<SECURITIES>                                     2,500
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,882
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      2,396
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                96,159
<PP&E>                                         253,416
<DEPRECIATION>                                 123,779
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 239,713
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           31,388
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                         204
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   195,026
<SALES>                                        230,047
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               237,606
<CGS>                                           50,481
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  122,556
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 36,781
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,976
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,805
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    22,805
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    $1.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $1.12
        

</TABLE>
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 3881

_____________________________
D ONTA A. L ONG , Appellant,

v.

M ARK S. I NCH , Secretary, Florida Department o f Corrections
, Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County

. John F. Simon , Judge

. May 29, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OWE , J AY , and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.

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

.

_____________________________2 Donta A. Long, pro se
, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.