alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 8, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 32639]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16074]



[[Page 32639]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1838-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]


West Virginia; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of West Virginia (FEMA-1838-DR), dated May 15, 2009, and related 
determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 24, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the 
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009, Public Law 111-32, FEMA is 
amending the cost-sharing arrangement concerning Federal funds provided 
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5170b, 5172, and 5173 for the major 
disaster declared on May 15, 2009, for the State of West Virginia due 
to the damage resulting from severe storms, flooding, mudslides, and 
landslides. The West Virginia major disaster declaration is amended as 
follows:

    Federal funds for (Categories C-G) under the Public Assistance 
program (Section 406) are authorized at 90 percent of total eligible 
costs and Federal funds for debris removal and emergency protective 
measures (Categories A and B), including direct Federal assistance, 
under the Public Assistance program (Sections 403 and 407) are 
authorized at 100 percent of total eligible costs.
    This cost share shall apply to disaster assistance provided 
before, on, or after June 24, 2009.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-16074 Filed 7-7-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00304-CV

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO,

Appellant

v.

Joel HERRERA,

Appellee

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-CI-04084

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI, JUSTICE MARION, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the trial court’s order 

denying defendant’s plea to the jurisdiction is REVERSED, and judgment is RENDERED 

dismissing the claim against the City of San Antonio for lack of jurisdiction. It is ORDERED that 

the City of San Antonio recover its costs of this appeal from Joel Herrera.

SIGNED October 16, 2013.

_____________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice
Case 2:10-mj-09375-ARM Document 2 Filed 11/24/10 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 2
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 13

- 00304

- CV

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO

, Appellant

v.

Joel HERRERA

, Appellee

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013

- CI

- 04084 Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI

, JUSTICE MARION , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the trial court’s order denying defendant’s plea to the jurisdiction is REVERSED, and judgment is RENDERED dismissing the claim against the City of San Antonio for lack of jurisdiction. It is ORDERED that the City of San Antonio recover its costs of this appeal from Joel Herrera.

SIGNED October 16 , 2013.

_____________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice
Exhibit 32.01
                                                                  -------------

                                 CERTIFICATION

      I, Gary D. Halbert, the President of ProFutures, Inc., as general partner
of ProFutures Diversified Fund, L.P., certify that (i) the Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2006 of ProFutures Diversified Fund, L.P.. fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of ProFutures Diversified Fund,
L.P.



                     PROFUTURES DIVERSIFIED FUND, L.P.

                     By:  ProFutures, Inc., general partner



                     By:  /s/ Gary D. Halbert

                          ---------------------------------
                          Gary D. Halbert
                          President
                          April 2, 2007
# table91_q11.3_naics
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 24, 2015

No. 04-15-00088-CV

FARIAS, et al,

Appellants

v.

REYNA, et al,

Appellees

From the 381st Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC-13-261

Honorable Jose Luis Garza, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellants' opposed motion for extension of time to file brief is hereby GRANTED. NO 

FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED. Time is extended to August 17, 2015.

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 24th day of July, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# Table 2000. educat
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 22, 2015

No. 04-15-00280-CR

Driss NASSOURI,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR2608

Honorable Steve Hilbig, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The court reporter has filed a notification of late reporter’s record, requesting an 

extension to August 10, 2015. We GRANT her request and ORDER her to file the reporter’s 

record on or before August 10, 2015. 

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 22nd day of July, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 125 (Wednesday, July 1, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 31404]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15709]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Sunshine Act Notice

AGENCY: United States Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

Date and Time: Friday, July 10, 2009; 9:30 a.m. EDT.

Place: 624 9th St., NW., Room 540, Washington, DC 20425.

Meeting Agenda

    This meeting is open to the public.
I. Approval of Agenda
II. Approval of Minutes of June 12, 2009 Meeting
III. Announcements
IV. Program Planning:
    <bullet> National Civil Rights Conference;
    <bullet> Update on Status of 2009 Statutory Report;
    <bullet> Discussion of 2010 Statutory Report Topic;
    <bullet> Approval of Briefing Report on Title IX.
V. State Advisory Committee Issues:
    <bullet> Virginia SAC.
VI. Adjourn

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting Chief, Public 
Affairs Unit (202) 376-8591. TDD: (202) 376-8116.
    Persons with a disability requiring special services, such as an 
interpreter for the hearing impaired, should contact Pamela Dunston at 
least seven days prior to the meeting at 202-376-8105. TDD: (202) 376-
8116.

    Dated: June 29, 2009.
David Blackwood,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E9-15709 Filed 6-29-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
#### International Strategies Group, Ltd, Respondent-Appellant, v ABN AMRO Bank N.V., Respondent, and First Merchant Bank OSH Ltd., Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 878]

The motion court correctly applied an actual knowledge standard in deciding that plaintiffs allegations are insufficient to *475state a cause of action against defendant-respondent for aiding and abetting defendant-appellant’s alleged fraud *(see National Westminster Bank v Weksel,*124 AD2d 144, 149 [1987], *lv denied*70 NY2d 604 [1987]; *see also JP Morgan Chase Bank v Winnick,*406 F Supp 2d 247, 252 n 4 [SD NY 2005]; *cf. Williams v Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, L.L.P.,*38 AD3d 219, 220 [2007]). We reject defendant-appellant’s argument that the documentary evidence conclusively establishes that plaintiffs assignor was aware of the alleged fraud more than three years prior to institution of the action, and that the action is therefore barred by California’s statute of limitations. We have considered the parties’ other arguments for affirmative relief and find them unavailing. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Buckley and Catterson, JJ.
Case 2:11-cv-00630-DMC -JAD Document 11 Filed 04/26/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 157
Case 2:11-cv-00630-DMC -JAD Document 11 Filed 04/26/11 Page 2 of 6 PageID: 158
Case 2:11-cv-00630-DMC -JAD Document 11 Filed 04/26/11 Page 3 of 6 PageID: 159
Case 2:11-cv-00630-DMC -JAD Document 11 Filed 04/26/11 Page 4 of 6 PageID: 160
Case 2:11-cv-00630-DMC -JAD Document 11 Filed 04/26/11 Page 5 of 6 PageID: 161
Case 2:11-cv-00630-DMC -JAD Document 11 Filed 04/26/11 Page 6 of 6 PageID: 162
Case 1:10-cv-03240-JHR -JS   Document 44    Filed 10/27/10   Page 1 of 3 PageID: 269

Case 1:10-cv-03240-JHR -JS   Document 44    Filed 10/27/10   Page 2 of 3 PageID: 270

Case 1:10-cv-03240-JHR -JS   Document 44    Filed 10/27/10   Page 3 of 3 PageID: 271
1. MA.RCKESE STEWART, DOB:

. FBI# 110126AB2 is now confined in SOUTH WOODS STATE PRISON.

2. Said individual will be required at United States District Court, before the Honorable Stanley R. Chesler, Friday, February 4, 2011 at

_is

11:00 a.m. for an ARRAIGNMENT, in the above captioned case, in which

a defendant and a Writ of Habeas Corpus should be issued for that purpose.

DATED: January 28, 2011

Assistant United States Attorney Petitioner Lisa M. Colone

ORDER FOR WRIT: Let the Writ Issue.

DATED ) / / /1,,7 I / 1HONOBLE STANLEY R. CHESLER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS: The United States of America to

WARDEN, SOUTH WOODS STATE PRISON

WE COMMAND YOU, that you have the body of Marckese Stewart, now

District

confined in South Woods State Prison brought to the United States

Jersey

Court before the Honorable Stanley R. Chesler in Newark, New on Friday, February 4th, 2011 at 11:00 am, for an ARRAIGNMENT, in the above-captioned matter. Immediately on completion of the proceedings, defendant will be returned to said place of confinement in safe and secure conduct.

WITNESS the Honorable Stanley R. Chesler

United States Magistrate Judge at Newark, N.J.

DATED: I WILLIAM T. WALSH I /; I 7 Clerk of the U.S. District Court

for the District of New Jersey

F

..1 ‘.r PeL 1cL Z’’ L_ Deputy Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Javier Maldonado, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 753]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd G. Goodman, J.), rendered on or about December 9, 2004, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833 [1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 460.20, defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice. Concur—Tom, J.E, Saxe, Friedman, Sullivan and McGuire, JJ.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1217 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to eliminate the taxable 

income limit on percentage depletion for oil and natural gas produced 

from marginal properties. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 11, 2019 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to eliminate 

the taxable income limit on percentage depletion for oil 

and natural gas produced from marginal properties. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF TAXABLE INCOME LIMIT ON 

4 PERCENTAGE DEPLETION FOR OIL AND NAT5 URAL GAS PRODUCED FROM MARGINAL 

6 PROPERTIES. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 613A(c)(6) of the Inter8 nal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the 

9 end the following new subparagraph: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 1217 IS

1 ‘‘(H) NONAPPLICATION OF TAXABLE IN2 COME LIMIT WITH RESPECT TO MARGINAL PRO3 DUCTION.—The second sentence of subsection 

4 (a) of section 613 shall not apply to so much 

5 of the allowance for depletion as is determined 

6 under subparagraph (A).’’. 

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

8 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

9 December 31, 2018. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6079** 

ELLIOTT LEWIS FIELDS, JR. , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. GENE JOHNSON, Director Virginia Department of Corrections, et al. , Re spondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Leonie M. Brinkema , District Judge. ( 1:10

- cv - 00839

- LMB

- IDD )

Submitted : March 15, 2012 Decided: March 20, 2012

Before DUNCAN and FLOYD , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Elliott Lewis Fields, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Elliott Lewis Fie lds, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2006) ; Reid v. Angelone , 369 F. 3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004).
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “ a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wron g. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, a nd that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Fields has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We3 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.

DISMISSED
@misc{1214711,
  author = {Harrison M. Skye},
  title = {Low-GWP Alternative Refrigerant Blends for HFC-134a (Presentation)},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-01-31 05:01:00},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=935471},
  language = {en},
}
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17A0742. BENJAMIN BIRBECK v. STATE OF GEORGIA.

Upon motion by the appellant, with the agreement of the appellee, this case is

hereby REMANDED to the trial court to allow it to correct and substitute a new

written sentencing order, after which the appellant may file a new Notice of Appeal

within thirty (30) days thereof, if he so desires. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

January 13, 2017

01/13/2017
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge

panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material

assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th

Cir. R. 34.1(G). The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

JAN 21 2004

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

EUGENE C. YOUNG,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DAVID MCKUNE, Warden, Lansing

KS; (FNU) BARKLEY, Case Worker

& Unit Team Manager; JOHN

COOLING, Chiefs Records Officer,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 03-3246

(D.C. No. 02-CV-3005-CM,

280 F.Supp.2d 1250)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before KELLY, BRISCOE, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.**

Plaintiff-Appellant Mr. Young, a pro se state prisoner, appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. R. Doc. 49, Young v.

McKune, 280 F. Supp. 2d 1250 (D. Kan. 2003). The parties are familiar with the
- 2 -

facts and we need not restate them here. Suffice it to say that Mr. Young alleged

that his former lawyer and various Kansas state officials violated his

constitutional rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and the Ex

Post Facto Clause by miscalculating his sentence under a newly amended Kansas

Administrative Regulation, Kan. Admin. Regs. 44-6-136. R. Doc. 1, at 3-4.

We review a dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) de novo. Dubbs v.

Head Start, Inc., 336 F.3d 1194, 1201 (10th Cir. 2003). This court has thoroughly

examined Mr. Young’s appellate brief, the district court’s memorandum and

order, and the entire record on appeal. For substantially those reasons set forth in

the district court’s memorandum and order dated July 30, 2003, R. Doc. 49, we

affirm the dismissal of his claims.

Entered for the Court

Paul J. Kelly, Jr.

Circuit Judge
CLOSED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

DARCY SMITH, PHD, : Civil Action No. 10-3319 (FSH)

:

Plaintiff, :

v. :

: O R D E R

CYNTHIA BORSELLA LINDEMANN, ESQ., :

et al. :

Defendants. :

 

It appearing that it has been reported to the Court that the above-entitled action has been

settled,

IT IS on this the 23 day of March, 2012, rd

ORDERED that this action is hereby dismissed without costs and without prejudice to the

right, upon good cause shown within 60 days, to make an application to the Court if the settlement

is not consummated. Failure to consummate the settlement will not result in the reopening of this

matter by the Court to address the merits of the case; rather, if the settlement is not consummated,

the Court will entertain an application solely to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement.

Counsel are on notice that the good cause requirement will be stringently applied, and will require

an affidavit detailing (a) the terms of the settlement agreement; and (b) why settlement could not be

consummated within 60 days. 

ORDERED that the terms of the settlement agreement are incorporated herein by reference

and the Court shall retain jurisdiction over the settlement agreement to enforce its terms. 

 s/ Faith S. Hochberg 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:10-cv-03319-KM-MCA Document 130 Filed 03/23/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 1260
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                             ABINGTON BANCORP, INC.
                              536 Washington Street
                               Abington, MA 02351



March 22, 2002



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549-0408

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         This letter is written pursuant to Temporary Note 3T to Article 3 of
Regulation S-X. Abington Bancorp, Inc. (the "Corporation") has received a
representation letter from Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen") stating that the
audit of the consolidated balance sheets of the Corporation and subsidiaries as
of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related consolidated statements of
income, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 2001, was subject to Andersen's quality control system
for the U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance
that the engagement was conducted in compliance with professional standards, and
that there was appropriate continuity of Andersen personnel working on the audit
and availability of national office consultation to conduct the relevant
portions of the audit.

                                    Very truly yours,

                                    ABINGTON BANCORP, INC.

                                    By: /s/ Robert M. Lallo
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Robert M. Lallo, Chief Financial Officer
1

The Honorable William Jay Riley became Chief Judge of the United States

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on April 1, 2010.

2

The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Arkansas. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3083

___________

Dollether Tobar, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Arkansas Department of Correction; *

Robert Jackson, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: March 31, 2010 

Filed: April 8, 2010

___________

Before RILEY,1

 Chief Judge, BYE and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Dollether Tobar appeals the district court’s2

 adverse grant of summary judgment

in her employment-discrimination action. After careful de novo review, see

Sutherland v. Mo. Dep’t of Corrs., 580 F.3d 748, 750 (8th Cir. 2009), we conclude
-2-

summary judgment was proper for the reasons stated in the district court’s thorough,

well-reasoned order. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________