alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 189 (Thursday, September 30, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60423-60424]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24523]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Docket No. DoD-2009-OS-0191]


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

[[Page 60424]]


DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by November 
1, 2010.
    Title and OMB Number: DoD Building Pass Application; DD Form 2249; 
OMB Number 0704-0328.
    Type of Request: Extension.
    Number of Respondents: 120,000.
    Responses per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 120,000.
    Average Burden per Response: 6 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 12,000 hours.
    Needs and Uses: This information collection requirement provides 
for the collection of information from applicants for DoD Building 
Passes. The information collected from the DD Form 2249, ``DoD Building 
Pass Application,'' is used to verify the need for and to issue a DoD 
Building Pass to DoD personnel, other authorized U.S. Government 
personnel, and DoD consultants and experts who regularly work in or 
require frequent and continuing access to DoD-owned or occupied 
buildings in the National Capital Region.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households; businesses of other 
for-profit.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.
    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Ms. Seehra at the Office of Management and 
Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and 
title, by the following method:
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency 
name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The 
general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the 
public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without 
change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.
    DOD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings.
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD/Information Management 
Division, 1777 North Kent Street, RPN, Suite 11000, Arlington, VA 
22209-2133.

    Dated: September 23, 2010.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2010-24523 Filed 9-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Balance Sheet at September 30, 2000 and the Consolidated Statement
of Operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2000 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000921112
<NAME> LIBERTY PROPERTY TRUST
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           5,388
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,859
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,070
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       3,146,257
<DEPRECIATION>                                 321,020
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,301,159
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      1,625,221
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    120,814
<COMMON>                                            68
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,197,635
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,301,159
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               394,899
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  110,302
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                68,388
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              79,535
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                134,388
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            134,388
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (2,103)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   109,041
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.60


</TABLE>
#### Clarence Lee ROBBINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D10-1796.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Feb. 7, 2011.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER curiam:.

In this appeal briefed pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), the appellant appeals the order entered by the trial court which revoked his probation based on his admission that he violated a number of conditions of probation. The order revoking probation erroneously indicates that the appellant violated condition five by committing a new law violation.1 However, while the appellant admitted other violations, the state specifically dismissed the allegation that the appellant violated condition five. Thus, we affirm the appellant’s convictions and sentences, but remand for entry of a corrected revocation order which omits reference to a violation of condition five.2*See, e.g., Campbell v. State,*972 So.2d 263 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (affirming order revoking probation but remanding for court to correct order to show correct ground for revocation).

AFFIRMED and REMANDED with instructions to enter a corrected revocation order.

KAHN, PADOVANO, and CLARK, JJ., concur.

1

. The issue was preserved for appeal by the filing of a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion.

2

. The order should also be corrected to reflect that a sentence of 31.5 months' imprisonment was imposed.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

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

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Boyd Bros. Transportation
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Gail B. Cooper, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
                  U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d); and

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

By: /s/ GAIL B.COOPER
   --------------------

Gail B. Cooper
Chief Executive Officer
August 12, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Boyd Bros. Transportation Inc. and will be retained by Boyd Bros.
Transportation Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

592 

KA 11-02142 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JOHN RAYNOR, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (ROBERT L. KEMP OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FRANK A. SEDITA, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DAVID PANEPINTO OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Kenneth F. Case,

J.), rendered August 24, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon

his plea of guilty, of attempted rape in the first degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him

upon his plea of guilty of attempted rape in the first degree (Penal

Law §§ 110.00; 130.35 [4]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, the

record establishes that he knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently

waived his right to appeal (see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248,

256). County Court advised defendant at the time of the waiver of the

potential maximum term of incarceration, and thus the waiver

encompasses defendant’s present challenge to the severity of his

sentence (see People v Grant, 96 AD3d 1697, 1697, lv denied 19 NY3d

997; see generally People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827; People v

Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737).

Entered: June 14, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
#### Jorge ARAUJO-ESPICHAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D10-2473.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

June 3, 2011.

Jorge Araujo-Espichan, Jasper, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Wesley Heidt, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Jorge Araujo-Espichan, seeks reversal of an order denying his motion to remove a lien from his inmate trust account. While the facts are somewhat confusing, it appears that the appellant filed two motions seeking the same relief below. A judge of the county court *684acting on one of the motions issued an order granting Araujo-Espichan’s motion for removal of improper lien. For reasons not readily apparent from the record, a judge of the circuit court rendered an order six months later denying relief on the second motion and refusing to remove the lien on appellant’s canteen funds.

The initial order issued by the county court should have ended the matter. The later order issued by the circuit court was a nullity. Accordingly, we reverse the order rendered by Judge Arnold on June 14, 2010, and remand with instructions to dissolve the lien. We further direct that the appellant be reimbursed for any funds improperly removed from his account pursuant to the lien order.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

MONACO, C.J., GRIFFIN and TORPY, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7308 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7308

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the disclosure of 
      notifications of intent to operate under section 501(c)(4).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 13, 2018

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the disclosure of 
      notifications of intent to operate under section 501(c)(4).

    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 ``Increased Transparency in 501(c)(4) 
Organizations Act of 2018''.

SEC. 2. DISCLOSURE OF NOTIFICATIONS OF INTENT TO OPERATE UNDER 
              501(C)(4).

    (a) In General.--Section 6104(d)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' in clause (iii), by adding 
``and'' at the end of clause (iv), and by inserting after clause (iv) 
the following new clause:
                            ``(v) any notification required to be made 
                        by such organization under section 506(a),''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to requests made after the date that is six months 
after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Davel M. ROSS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2D10-5094.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 15, 2011.

BLACK, Judge.

Davel M. Ross appeals an order summarily denying the three claims in his postconviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm without comment the summary denial of all three claims; however, we reverse for the postconviction court to address the merits of Mr. Ross’ amended motion, which was filed after the original motion, within the two-year time period, and prior to the trial court’s ruling on the original motion. *See Pritchett v. State,*884 So.2d 417, 418 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.

NORTHCUTT and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
| (logo) WELLS   

           FARGO | Corporate Trust Services

 

MAC R1204-010

9062 Old Annapolis Rd

Columbia, MD 21045

 

Tel: 410 884-2000

Fax: 410 715 2380

  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.

c/o Wells Fargo Securities, LLC

375 Park Avenue 2nd floor

MAC J0127-023

New York, NY 10152-023

 

RE:  Annual Statement of Compliance

 

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator and Paying Agent for the Oak Court Mall Companion Loan (in such capacities, “Wells Fargo”), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the “reporting period”):

 

 

(a)  A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the reporting period and of its performance under the applicable servicing agreement(s) listed on Schedule A hereto (the "Servicing Agreement(s)") has been made under my supervision; and

 

(b)  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement(s) in all material respects throughout the reporting period, except as noted on Schedule B.

 

March 19, 2015

 

 

/s/  Brian Smith

Brian Smith

Vice President

 

To:  Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.

Schedule A

 

 

List of Servicing Agreement(s) and Series

 

Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2014, by and among RBS COMMERICAL FUNDING INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as General Master Servicer, CWCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC, as General Special Servicer, NCB, FSB, as NCB Master Servicer, NCB, FSB, as Co-op Special Servicer, TRIMONT REAL ESTATE ADVISORS, INC., as Trust Advisor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, as Tax Administrator and as Custodian, and WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2014-C21 relating to the Oak Court Mall Companion Loan a pari passu portion of which is included in the Series WFRBS 2014-LC16 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates transaction.

 

 

 

To:  Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.

Schedule B

 

 

Material Non-Compliance with Servicing Obligations

 

Not Applicable
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32


                                  CERTIFICATION

The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer, and as the Chief Financial
Officer of Boyd Bros Transportation Inc., respectively, certify that, to the
best of their knowledge and belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended June 30, 2004, which accompanies this certification fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Boyd
Bros. Transportation Inc., at the dates and for the periods indicated. The
foregoing certifications are made pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss. 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose.

This the 16th day of August 2004.



                                                /s/ GAIL B. COOPER
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Gail B. Cooper
                                                Chief Executive


                                                /s/ RICHARD C. BAILEY
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Richard C. Bailey
                                                Chief Financial Officer

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 Boyd Bros. Transportation Inc. and
will be retained by Boyd Bros Transportation Inc., and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Kelvin L. MOSLEY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D11-0897.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 6, 2011.

Kelvin L. Mosley, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the merits.

BENTON, C.J., HAWKES and CLARK, JJ., concur.
#### State of Indiana *v.*Chapius et al.

[No. 19,893.

Filed January 10, 1963.]

*Edwin K. Steers,*Attorney General, for appellant.

*Samuel Fuller*and *Murray, Mannon, Fairchild & Stetoart,*of Indianapolis, for appellees.

Cooper, C. J.

This matter is now before us upon the appellant’s motion to dismiss appeal.

It appearing from the record in the cause now before us that the appellee has not filed cross errors in said cause, and the court being duly advised in *226the premises, now sustains the appellant’s motion to dismiss said appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

Note. — Reported in 187 N. E. 2d 105.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02

- 20

- 00305

- CV

___________________________

Or igi nal Proceeding

158th District Court of Denton County, Texas

Trial Court No. 19

- 9663

- 158

Before Gabriel, Bassel, and Wallach, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion 

### I N RE 

### R EBECCA 

### B ILLMEIER 

### , Relator2 MEMORANDUM OPINION

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus a nd motio n

for emergency relief and is of the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly,

relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency relief is denied. 1

Per Curiam

Delivered : September 30 , 2020

1 To the ext ent that relator is attempting to invoke this court ’s appellate

jurisdiction, rather than its writ jurisdiction, relator failed to file a timely notic e of

appeal ; therefore, we do not have jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal from the

trial court ’ s order

. See Tex . R. App. P. 26.1 (b) , 26.3 ; see also Tex. Civ. Pr ac. & Rem.

Code Ann. § 51.014(a)( 4

).
Exhibit 3.2 Continued

                             AMENDMENT TO THE BYLAWS

                                January 21, 2005

      A. Article IX of the Bylaws of Usurf America,  Inc., a Nevada  corporation
(the   "Corporation"),   provides   that  a  majority  of  the  members  of  the
Corporation's  Board of  Directors  (the  "Board")  have the  power to amend the
Bylaws of the Corporation ("Bylaws") at any regular or special meeting.

      B. The  Board  desires,  and  deems it to be in the best  interest  of the
Corporation, to add new Article XIII to the Bylaws.

      RESOLVED , that Article XIII of the Bylaws is added to the Bylaws to read,
      in its entirety, as follows:

      Article XIII - Acquisition of Controlling Interests

      The provisions of Nevada Revised  Statutes  Sections  78.378 to 78.3793 do
      not apply to any  acquisition  of the capital stock of the  Corporation by
      Sovereign Partners, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, its members
      or its affiliates.


           [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]

<PAGE>

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  the foregoing  Amendment to the Bylaws was adopted by
the Board effective as of January 21, 2005.



                                    /s/ Douglas O. McKinnon
                                    ------------------------------------
                                        President and CEO