alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 36275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17382]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318; NRC-2009-0321]


Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc.; Notice of Withdrawal of 
Application for Amendment to Facility Operating License

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted 
the request of Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc. (the licensee) 
to withdraw its October 1, 2008, application for proposed amendment to 
Facility Operating License No. DPR-53 and DPR-69 for the Calvert Cliffs 
Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, located in Calvert County, 
Maryland.
    The proposed amendments would introduce new license conditions 
requiring the reporting of reactor vessel (RV) inservice inspection 
(ISI) information and analyses as specified in Federal Register Notice 
(72 FR 56275) dated October 3, 2007, ``Alternate Fracture Toughness 
Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events.'' 
These amendments were a required part of a code relief request, 
submitted by the licensee on October 1, 2008, to extend the RV ISI 10-
year inspection interval for RV weld examinations.
    The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register on December 16, 
2008 (73 FR 76409). However, by letter dated July 8, 2009, the licensee 
withdrew the proposed change.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated October 1, 2008, and the licensee's 
letter dated July 8, 2009, which withdrew the application for license 
amendment. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the 
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically 
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) 
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents 
located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by 
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1b6b7f6935697e68746e69787e5b756978357c746d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cbbbafb9e5b9aeb8a4beb9a8ae8ba5b9a8e5aca4bd">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of July 2009.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Douglas V. Pickett,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-1, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-17382 Filed 7-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 32.2
 Certification Pursuant To
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant To
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    the report on Form 10-Q of Viad Corp for the fiscal quarter ended March 31,
2011 (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 Viad Corp.
 Date: May 6, 2011
    By
    /s/ Ellen M. IngersollEllen M. IngersollChief Financial Officer
# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted May 4, 2011

Decided May 6, 2011

Before

ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge

TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge

DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge

No. 10

‐ 3365

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

‐ Appellee

,

v.

JAMAAL DESHAWN LEE,

Defendant

‐ Appellant

. Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.

No. 10

‐ CR

‐ 89

‐ BBC

‐ 01

Barbara B. Crabb

Judge

.

O R D E R

Agents with the Drug Enforcement Administration arrested Jamaal Lee after he sold

cocaine to an informant in Madison, Wisconsin. Lee was charged with distributing cocaine,

21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(E)(ii). He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 30 months’

imprisonment, the top of his guidelines range. Lee filed a notice of appeal, but his

appointed lawyer moves to withdraw on the ground that the case is frivolous. See Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Lee has not responded to counsel’s submission. See C IR

. R.

51(b). We confine our review to the points discussed in counsel’s facially adequate brief.

See United States v. Schuh

, 289 F.3d 968, 973

‐ 74 (7th Cir. 2002). NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1No. 10

‐ 3365 Page 2

We are given no indication that Lee wants his guilty plea vacated, so counsel

appropriately omits discussing possible challenges to the plea colloquy or the voluntariness

of the plea. See United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667, 671 (7th Cir. 2002). Counsel details his

thorough search through the record for possible challenges to Lee’s sentence, but he did not

find even an arguable appellate claim in this straightforward prosecution. Counsel devotes

the most attention to whether Lee could argue that the district court failed to adequately

consider the sentencing factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Counsel has concluded that this

potential argument would be frivolous, and we agree. At sentencing, Lee argued that he did

not deserve to be imprisoned because his criminal behavior was a result of drug addiction

and negative family influences. He said he should be sentenced to probation so he could go

to drug treatment right away. But the district court did not ignore these arguments; the

court considered them and decided they were outweighed by the need to deter Lee from

continuing to break the law and adding to his already extensive criminal history. The court

addressed all of Lee’s arguments in mitigation and offered an adequate explanation for the

sentence it chose, and compliance with § 3553(a) requires nothing more. S ee United States v.

Kilgore

, 591 F.3d 890, 893 (7th Cir. 2010).

The motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 176
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 2 of 19 PageID: 177
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 3 of 19 PageID: 178
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 4 of 19 PageID: 179
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 5 of 19 PageID: 180
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 6 of 19 PageID: 181
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 7 of 19 PageID: 182
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 8 of 19 PageID: 183
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 9 of 19 PageID: 184
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 10 of 19 PageID: 185
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 11 of 19 PageID: 186
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 12 of 19 PageID: 187
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 13 of 19 PageID: 188
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 14 of 19 PageID: 189
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 15 of 19 PageID: 190
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 16 of 19 PageID: 191
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 17 of 19 PageID: 192
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 18 of 19 PageID: 193
Case 3:11-cv-03731-FLW -TJB Document 16 Filed 08/10/11 Page 19 of 19 PageID: 194
# laucnty95

&8Page &P of &N
EX-10.38



 Exhibit 10.38 
 AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 Section 1 of the Amended and Restated Employment
Agreement (“Agreement”), by and between the parties to the Agreement (as named below), dated as of May 24, 2007, as amended, is hereby further amended effective as of the 8th day of March, 2013 (“Amendment”), for the purpose
of making the following change: 
 Section 1 (“Term”) is hereby revised to read as follows: 

Section 1.Term. Employer hereby continues the employment of Employee and Employee hereby accepts
continued employment with Employer for a term (“Term”) that shall continue until December 31, 2014; provided, however, that effective January 1, 2014 and each succeeding January 1st thereafter, the Term shall automatically be extended for an
additional year unless either Party has notified the other at least 12 months prior to such January 1st automatic renewal date that such Party has elected not to extend the Term. 
 Except as set forth
above in this Amendment, the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 
 As evidenced by signature below, the parties to
the Agreement and this Amendment agree to the terms and conditions of this Amendment, both as to form and substance. 
  

			
	EMPLOYEE:
	
	/s/ Lawrance W. McAfee
	Lawrance W. McAfee
	
	EMPLOYER:
	
	U.S. Physical Therapy, Inc.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Jerald Pullins
	Jerald Pullins
	Chairman of the Board of Directors
Case 3:11-cv-04194-PGS-DEA Document 51-2 Filed 03/18/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 895
Case 3:11-cv-04194-PGS-DEA Document 51-2 Filed 03/18/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 896
EXHIBIT 10.5.1


AMENDMENT TO

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION 

EXECUTIVE SAVINGS PLAN

(as Amended and Restated Effective as of January 1, 2008)


The Duke Energy
Corporation Executive Savings Plan (as Amended and Restated Effective as of
January 1, 2008) (the "Plan") is amended, effective as of July 30,
2010, as follows:


1.             Section 7.12 of the Plan is
hereby amended by adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:


"(h) Small Payments.  Subject to
Section 7.11, the Committee may, in its sole discretion, require a mandatory
lump sum payment of the portion of a Participant’s Account balance attributable
to Post-2004 Deferrals if such amount does not exceed the applicable dollar
amount under Section 402(g)(1)(B) of the Code, provided that the payment results
in the termination and liquidation of the entirety of the Participant’s
Post-2004 Deferrals plus amounts under all agreements, methods, programs or
other arrangements with respect to which deferrals of compensation are treated
as having been deferred under a single nonqualified deferred compensation plan
under Section 409A of the Code."  


2.             Except as explicitly set forth
herein, the Plan will remain in full force and effect.


This amendment has been executed by an
authorized officer of Duke Energy Corporation effective as of July 30, 2010.


DUKE ENERGY
CORPORATION


 


   By:______/s/ JENNIFER L. WEBER____________ 


Jennifer  L. Weber


Senior Vice President and


Chief Human Resources Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIA Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Charles J. Stubbs, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ CHARLES J. STUBBS                
|Charles J. Stubbs,                   
|                                     
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|                                     

May 8, 2009

This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

 *** The Honorable Gordon J. Quist, Senior District Judge for the U.S.

District Court for Western Michigan, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

PETER JERALD FROMMER,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 11-50146

D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00109-GW-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 12, 2012** 

Pasadena, California

Before: KLEINFELD and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges, and QUIST, Senior

District Judge.*** 

FILED

OCT 29 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Peter Frommer appeals his sentence of 108 months. We reject his arguments

and affirm. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a). 

We review whether the district court made sufficient factual findings de

novo. U.S. v. Forrester, 616 F.3d 929, 934 (9th Cir. 2010). We review substantive

reasonableness of the sentence for abuse of discretion. Gall v. U.S., 552 U.S. 38,

51 (2007). Frommer failed to object to the district judge’s treatment of the

sentencing factors below, so we review for plain error. U.S. v. Valencia-Barragan,

608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010).

 

The district court made sufficient findings of fact and resolved the factual

disputes by adopting the prosecution’s position. U.S. v. Karterman, 60 F.3d 576

(9th Cir. 1995). Considering the manner in which Frommer committed the crime

and the severe victim impact, the district court did not abuse its discretion by

sentencing above the guidelines. Finally, the district court did not plainly err in

considering the necessary sentencing factors. U.S. v. Daniels, 541 F.3d 915, 922

(9th Cir. 2008).

AFFIRMED
#### Jonathan JOHNSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN, BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent-Appellee, and Bill Byars, Director, SC Dept. of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 12-7563.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 13, 2012.

Decided: Dec. 19, 2012.

Jonathan Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jonathan Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability 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 wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense -with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
EXHIBIT 31.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Maurice H. Madrid, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Sales Strategies, Inc.;

2.  Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  report  does not  contain  any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements
were made,  not  misleading  with  respect to the period  covered by this annual
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included  in this annual  report,  fairly  present in all  material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed  such  disclosure  controls and  procedures  to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others  within those  entities,  particularly  during the
period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  registrant's  disclosure  controls and
procedures  as of a date  within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions  about the  effectiveness  of
the  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  based  on our  evaluation  as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors:

a) all significant  deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which  could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability  to record,  process,
summarize and report  financial data and have  identified  for the  registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls
or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent
to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: September 22, 2003                 /s/Maurice H. Madrid
                                         ---------------------
                                         Maurice H. Madrid
                                         Acting Financial Officer/
                                         Director
[No. 55475-1-I.

Division One.

December 19, 2005.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Glenn Tyler Smith, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Snohomish County, No. 04-1-00207-3, Stephen J. Dwyer, J., entered December 2, 2004. *Reversed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-2991

HOMER DELOVICH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ROBERT B. REICH, SECRETARY OF LABOR,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District

Judge. (CA-94-24-1)

Submitted: May 14, 1996 Decided: June 6, 1996

Before ERVIN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Homer Delovich, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr., OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order granting

summary judgment to Defendant in Appellant's employment discrimination action. 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. Delovich v. Reich,

No. CA-94-24-1 (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 10, 1995). 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
# Major Economic Indicators Latest Numbers

Latest Numbers for Major Economic Indicators, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

- Major Economic Indicators Latest Numbers Consumer Price Index (CPI):					+0.4%  in Mar 2024					News Release							Historical Data													           Unemployment Rate:					3.8%  in Mar 2024					News Release							Historical Data								           Payroll Employment:					+303,000(p)  in Mar 2024					News Release							Historical Data								           Average Hourly Earnings:					+$0.12(p)  in Mar 2024					News Release							Historical Data													           Producer Price Index - Final Demand:					+0.2%(p)  in Mar 2024					News Release							Historical Data													           Employment Cost Index (ECI):					+0.9%  in 4th Qtr of 2023					News Release							Historical Data													           Productivity:					+3.2%  in 4th Qtr of 2023					News Release							Historical Data													           U.S. Import Price Index:					+0.4%  in Mar 2024					News Release							Historical Data								           U.S. Export Price Index:					+0.3%  in Mar 2024					News Release							Historical Data																p- preliminary