alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 3, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26597-26598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12855]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 20

[REG-119532-08]
RIN 1545-BH94


Section 2036--Graduated Retained Interests; Correction

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (REG-119532-08) that was published in the Federal Register 
on Thursday, April 30, 2009, at 74 FR 19913. The corrections relate to 
proposed regulations that provide guidance on the portion of trust 
property includible in the grantor's gross estate if the grantor has 
retained the use of the property, the right to an annuity, unitrust, 
graduated retained interest, or other payment from such property for 
life, for any period not ascertainable without reference to the 
grantor's death, or for a period that does not in fact end before the 
grantor's death.

[[Page 26598]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theresa M. Melchiorre, (202) 622-3090 
(not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The notice of proposed rulemaking that is the subject of this 
document is under section 2036 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Need for Correction

    As published, the notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-119532-08) 
that published on April 30, 2009 (74 FR 19913) does not accurately 
reflect the information intended to be communicated and thus needs 
clarification.

Correction to Publication

    Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking which was the 
subject of FR Doc. E9-10003 is corrected as follows:
    On page 19917, Sec.  20.2036-1 (c)(2)(iii) Example 7 (iii), the 
chart at the top of the page is corrected to read as follows:


Sec.  20.2036-1  Transfers with retained life estate.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    Example 7. * * *
    (iii) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP03JN09.046
    
* * * * *

Cynthia E. Grigsby,
Senior Federal Register Liaison Officer, Publications and Regulations 
Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure 
and Administration).
[FR Doc. E9-12855 Filed 6-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### HANLEY v. RAP-I-DOL DISTRIBUTING CORPORATION et al.

District Court, S. D. New York.

Jan. 16, 1946.

Michael H. Grae, of St. George, N. Y., for plaintiff.

John W. Trapp, of New York City, for defendants.

HULBERT, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves for an order directing the Clerk of this Court to submit to the plaintiff, or her attorney, the stenographic minutes taken at the trial of this action now in his possession, for the purpose of completing the typewritten record in this case, the same to be thereafter returned to the Clerk of this Court.

The defendant manufactures and distributes a hair dye which the plaintiff purchased and applied to her hair and claims that a dermatitis developed and she sued to recover damages for the resulting injury.

The case was tried to the Court and a jury, terminating on Oct. 22, 1945 in a verdict in favor of the defendant.

From the judgment.thereon entered the plaintiff appealed to the U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 2nd .Circuit.

The stenographic minutes supplied by the Court Reporter to the defendant consists of 596 pages; a copy thereof was furnished to the trial Judge and thereafter filed with the Clerk of the Court. The remainder of the stenographic minutes which have not been transcribed would produce approximately 350 additional pages for which the Reporter’s charge is 40 cents per page.

The preparation and filing of the record on appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals is regulated by Federal Rules Civil Procedure, rule 75, 28 U.S.C.A. following § 723c.

On an application made by plaintiff to the Appellate Court an order was made granting her leave to present and argue the case upon a typewritten record and typewritten briefs, but that Court declined to direct the defendant to furnish the plaintiff with its copy of the stenographic minutes. Hence this motion.

Since the Court of Appeals has dispensed with the printing of the record, the procedure, as this Court understands it to be, is that the appellant must submit three copies of the typewritten record.

*116That portion of the record on file in the Office of the Clerk is a public document. The defendant has a right to require that a transcript of all of the stenographic minutes be certified by the Clerk. The plaintiff’s counsel stated on the argument of the motion that he would procure the balance of the record which should be filed with the Clerk. If and when he does that, this Court perceives no reason why the Clerk should not be authorized to deliver the stenographic minutes to the plaintiff’s attorney for the purpose of enabling him to make three copies thereof and return the original to the Clerk.

Motion granted as above indicated. Settle order on notice.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 22-1201

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Marcello Lamar

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

 ____________

Submitted: July 22, 2022

Filed: July 27, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Marcello Lamar appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he

pleaded guilty to possessing with intent to distribute a methamphetamine mixture. 

1The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Arkansas.
His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the district court’s application of the

United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“Guidelines”) provisions for actual

methamphetamine and the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

We conclude the district court did not plainly err in determining Lamar’s base

offense level based on the undisputed weight of the actual methamphetamine. See

United States v. Kirlin, 859 F.3d 539, 543 (8th Cir. 2017) (reviewing district court’s

application of Guidelines de novo and its findings of fact for clear error but for plain

error if defendant fails to timely object); U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c) cmt. n.B (in case of

mixture containing methamphetamine, use offense level determined by entire weight

of mixture or by weight of actual methamphetamine, whichever is greater); see also

United States v. Aparicio-Leon, 963 F.3d 470, 473 (5th Cir. 2020) (holding no error

where district court used undisputed pure methamphetamine weight to determine base

offense level despite indictment charging possession of methamphetamine mixture). 

We also conclude the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable

sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en

banc) (reviewing sentence under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard); United

States v. Sharkey, 895 F.3d 1077, 1082 (8th Cir. 2018) (noting sentencing court may,

but need not, vary downward based on policy disagreement with Guidelines).

Finally, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant

counsel leave to withdraw.

______________________________

-2-
EXHIBIT 3(i).2

                (Articles of Amendment, dated November 24, 1980)

<PAGE>


                              ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT

                                       OF
                        AMERICAN CONSOLIDATED MINING, CO,
                   (formerly American Consolidated Mines, Co.)

         We, the undersigned, being the president and secretary of American
Consolidated Mining, Co., formerly American Consolidated Mines, Co., pursuant to
a duly held special directors meeting on the 21st day of November, 1980 at the
hour of 10:00 a.m. in accordance with the Utah Business Corporation Act, Title
16, Section 10, providing for the amendment of corporate articles, hereby adopt
the following amendment to the Articles of Incorporation.

                                    ARTICLE I
                                DIRECTORS ACTION

         The shareholders of the corporation at a duly and regularly scheduled
meeting of the directors on the 21st day of November 1980, approved the
amendment of the Articles of Incorporation changing the name of the corporation.
At the time of the directors meeting there were no shares of common stock
outstanding and entitled to vote with regard to the adoption of this amendment.
All action taken was prior to the issuance of any stock.

                                   ARTICLE II
                               NAME OF CORPORATION

         The following resolution was adopted by the directors:

         RESOLVED, that the name of the corporation be changed to American
Consolidated Mining, Co. and that this amendment supercede the former name of
the corporation, American Consolidated Mines, Co.

                                   ARTICLE II
                               SCOPE OF AMENDMENT

         The adoption of this amendment shall superceded the original name of
the corporation in its entirety and shall constitute an amendment to the
original Articles of Incorporation.

         DATED this 24th day of November, 1980.

                                  AMERICAN CONSOLIDATED MINING, CO.
                                  Formerly American Consolidated Mines, Co.


                                  By /s/ Steven J. Haslam
                                     ---------------------
                                       President

Attest:

 /s/ William D. Moeller
-------------------------------
Secretary


<PAGE>



STATE OF UTAH                  )
                               :ss
COUNTY OF SALT LAKE            )

         SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 24th day of November, 1980.

                                                       /s/ Tammy Reich
                                                     ----------------------
                                                     NOTARY PUBLIC

                       Residing in Salt Lake County, Utah

My Commission Expires:
       4-25-83
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2686 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2686

 To extend and modify the temporary reduction of duty on cyclopropane-
                 1,1-dicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 2, 2009

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend and modify the temporary reduction of duty on cyclopropane-
                 1,1-dicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester.

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

SECTION 1. CYCLOPROPANE-1,1-DICARBOXYLIC ACID, DIMETHYL ESTER.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.10.69 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to cyclopropane-1,1-
dicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``1.8%'' and inserting ``Free''; and
            (2) by striking the date in the effective period column and 
        inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.2




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



In connection with the Quarterly  Report of CNH Holdings  Company on Form 10-QSB
for the period  ending  September  30, 2002,  as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,  Charles  Stidham,
Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. SS 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (1)      the Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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




/S/Charles Stidham
Treasurer and Director
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
November 5, 2002
#### Joyce Henderson, Respondent, v Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

Submitted January 3, 2011;

decided February 10, 2011

Motion to vacate this Court’s December 16, 2010 dismissal order granted *[see*15 NY3d 951 (2010)].
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

Consent of Independent Auditors 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-104873) pertaining to the 401(k) Salary Reduction Plan and Trust, the 2001Stock Option Plan, and the Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 No. 333-110603 and No. 333-108848) of Sirna Therapeutics, Inc. (formerly known as Ribozyme Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) of our report dated January 23,2004, with respect to the financial statements of Sirna Therapeutics, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2003. 

 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

 

Denver, Colorado 

March 17, 2004
#### Penguin Group (USA) Inc., Appellant, v American Buddha, Respondent.

Decided February 10, 2011

*See*609 F3d 30.

On the Court’s own motion, reargument granted and, upon reargument, motion by Public Citizen for leave to file a brief amicus curiae and to participate in oral argument on consideration of the certified question herein granted.
Exhibit
      23.1





**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      SB-2 (File Nos. 333 130254 and 333 120879) and on Form S-8 (File No. 333 128344)
      of Spectre Gaming, Inc. of our report dated February 10, 2006, except for Note
      18, as to which the date is March 21, 2006 and Notes 2, 5 and 19, as to which
      the date is May 23, 2006, which appears on page 25 of this annual report on
      Form
      10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2005.








/s/
                VIRCHOW, KRAUSE & COMPANY, LLP





Minneapolis,
      Minnesota


May 25,
      2006
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, 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

December 16, 2010 

s1209 

Order 

 

December 16, 2010 

141457 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141457 

 COA: 289540 

 Grand Traverse CC: 

08-010647-FH 

STEVEN DANIEL SMOOT, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 1, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We DIRECT the Grand Traverse 

County Prosecuting Attorney to answer the application for leave to appeal within 28 days 

after the date of this order. The prosecutor shall pay particular attention to the 

defendant’s contention that the trial prosecutor engaged in pervasive misconduct. 

The application for leave to appeal remains pending.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2712 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on D-Mannose. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 2, 2009 

Mr. LAUTENBERG introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on D-Mannose. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. D-MANNOSE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.12.19 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 D-Mannose) is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/2009’’ and in7 serting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

10 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

11 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
EX-10(T)(2)



 





Exhibit
10(t)(2)



[Grantee]

[Address]

[Address]




Dear [Grantee]:




     This letter agreement amends the Restricted Stock award granted to you on [Grant Date]
pursuant to the terms of The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended
from time to time (the “Plan”), and the Award Agreement for Employees (the “Award Agreement”). This
amendment shall be effective as of October 30, 2007 (the “Amendment Effective Date”). Unless
otherwise defined in this letter agreement, capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings
provided to them in the Award Agreement.



     The Compensation and Organization Committee (the “Committee”) has determined that your Award
Agreement shall be amended to provide for a reasonable rate of interest to be calculated with
respect to certain cash dividends held in escrow during the Period of Restriction (as defined in
the Plan) relating to your shares of Restricted Stock. Accordingly, the following paragraph is
hereby added to the Award Agreement:




“A reasonable rate of interest, as determined by the Committee in its sole discretion, will
be credited to you and held in escrow during the Period of Restriction (as defined in the
Plan) with respect to any cash dividends that were or are declared and paid in respect of
your shares of Restricted Stock during the period that began on December 20, 2006 and that
ends on [Vesting Date]. At the end of the Period of Restriction, such interest will be
distributed to you if all restrictions and conditions relating to your shares of Restricted
Stock are met or will be forfeited if those restrictions and conditions have not been met.”



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	THE SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO COMPANY	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 

	 	Title:	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 





Acknowledged and agreed,

effective as of the Amendment

Effective Date:




	 	 	 
	 
	 	 
	Grantee’s Signature
Exhibit 23.2 

Consent of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm 

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 Nos. 333-45983, 333-72107, 333-96707,333-106117 and 333-115636) of Derma Sciences, Inc. and Subsidiaries of our report datedFebruary 20, 2004, with respect to the 2003 consolidated financial statements of DermaSciences, Inc. and Subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the yearended December 31, 2004. 

          /s/Ernst & Young LLP 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
No. 829.

#### Brady et al. *v.*Beams et al.

March 30, 1942.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2525 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2525

To extend and modify the temporary suspension of duty on certain men's 
  footwear, valued over $23/pair, with a coated or laminated textile 
                                fabric.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 30, 2009

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend and modify the temporary suspension of duty on certain men's 
  footwear, valued over $23/pair, with a coated or laminated textile 
                                fabric.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN MEN'S FOOTWEAR, VALUED OVER $23/PAIR, WITH A COATED 
              OR LAMINATED TEXTILE FABRIC.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.77 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain men's footwear, 
valued over $23/pair, with a coated or laminated textile fabric) is 
amended--
            (1) by striking ``$20/pair'' and inserting ``$23/pair''; 
        and
            (2) by striking the date in the effective period column and 
        inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
2017 BLM SAFECOM 

SUMMARY 

Kirk Rothwell National Aviation Safety & Training Advisor 

11/13/17 
 

 

2017 BLM Safecoms 

8 

11 

32 

1 

39 

12 

4 

Aircraft Type 

Airtanker Multi-engine 

SEAT 

Helicopter 

Helitanker 

Airplane 

UAS 

Other 

10% 

30% 37% 

11% 

7% 

3% 

Other: Safecoms submitted that did not fit 

into the scope of the Safecom system. Such as 

inappropriate attempts at defaming aviation 

users, private company submissions and 

duplicates. 

BLM Total FY17 = 107 
 

2017 BLM Safecom by Category 

Note, a single safecom submission may have multiple categories assigned. 
2017 BLM Safecoms 

2017 Type 2016 

# Submitted % # Submitted % 

8 7 Airtanker 

(multi-engine) 5 4 

11 10 SEAT 12 19 

32 30 Helicopter 45 35 

1 1 Helitanker 1 1 

39 37 Airplane 44 34 

12 11 UAS 14 11 

4 3 N/A 6 2 

Total 107 ~17% 127 
30 

2017 BLM Safecoms 

27 

19 

2 

0 

11 

6 6 

0 

8 8 

3 

16 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

AK AZ CA CO ID MT NV NM OR/WA UT WY NAO 

Safecom 
 

Safecom Annual Submission Average 

with Flight Time Correlation 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 

RW (avg 48) 

FW (avg 38) 

SEAT (avg 13) 

UAS (avg = 6 ) 

Total 

Flt 

Hrs. 

18,501 17,453 19,682 17,236 30,322 24,900 15,040 22,338 23, 846 23,507 

RW 6404 6589 8831 6227 12,285 6724 5974 4852 8856 8892 

FW 6916 7432 8527 8643 12,169 13,602 6474 12646 14624 6747 

SEAT 4921 1817 1493 2366 5868 4574 2592 4439 1927 7868 

UAS 0 0 0 0 0 UNK UNK 69 62 435 
 

2017 BLM Safecom 

Submission Rate 

Aircraft 

Type 

2017 Flt 

Hours 

Total Safecom 

Submissions Per flight hour 

Rotor Wing 8892 33 (6 USFS) 1/228 

Fixed Wing 6747 47 1/144 

SEAT 7868 12 1/655 

UAS 435 12 1/36 

Total All 23,942 107 1/224 

*Safecoms submitted during BLM Operational Control only* 

Does not reflect submissions by BLM aviation while under other bureau or agency operational control.