alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 2, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Page 81]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-32252]


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

FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD


Employee Thrift Advisory Council; Open Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), a notice is hereby given of the 
following committee meeting:
    Name: Employee Thrift Advisory Council.
    Time: 10:30 a.m.
    Date: January 15, 2002.
    Place: 4th Floor, Conference Room, Federal Retirement Thrift 
Investment Board, 1250 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
    Status: Open.
    Matters to Be Considered:
    1. Approve minutes of the June 27, 2000, meeting.
    2. Report of the Executive Director on Thrift Savings Plan status.
    3. November 15, 2001-January 31, 2002, Thrift Savings Plan Open 
Season.
    4. Legislation.
    5. New TSP record keeping system.
    6. New business.
    Any interested person may attend, appear before, or file statements 
with the Council. For further information contact Elizabeth S. 
Woodruff, Committee Management Officer, on (202) 942-1660.

    Dated: December 27, 2001.
Elizabeth S. Woodruff,
General Counsel, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.
[FR Doc. 01-32252 Filed 12-28-01; 5:23 pm]
BILLING CODE 6760-01-M
#### Lillian WOODY; Fred Woody, Jr., Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION; Bank of America, N.A.; BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., Defendants—Appellees. Lillian Woody; Fred Woody, Jr., Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. Bank of America Corporation; Bank of America, N.A.; BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., Defendants—Appellees.

Nos. 10-1775, 10-1852.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 16, 2010.

Decided: Dec. 22, 2010.

Lillian Woody and Fred Woody, Jr., Appellants Pro Se. Joseph Samuel Dowdy, Donald Richard Pocock, Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, LLP, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees.

*799Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lillian and Fred Woody (“Appellants”) appeal the district court’s orders dismissing their statutory and common law claims against Bank of America Corp., Bank of America, N.A., and BAC Home Loans Servicing (“Appellees”). Appellants also appeal the district court’s order denying their motion for a new trial. We affirm both judgments.

Appellants raised several claims in the district court invoking the Truth-in-Lending Act, the Home Owners Equity Protection Act, the Federal Reserve Board’s regulations, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act, among others. On appeal, Appellants have abandoned the majority of their statutory and common law claims, arguing that the district court erred in failing to rule on their claim that Appellees violated North Carolina law by failing to file a prospectus and registration statement. However, Appellants failed to raise this claim to any legally discernable degree in their complaint, and to the extent that they attempted to elaborate on it in subsequent filings and on appeal in this court, we conclude that the argument is waived.

Appellants claim that the district court erred in denying their motion to join additional parties. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. *Woody v. Bank of Am. Corp.,*No. 5:09-cv-00398-D, 2010 WL 2332732 (E.D.N.C., June 9, 2010). Finally, Appellants claim that the court erred in denying their motion for a new trial. Again, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We affirm on that basis. *Woody v. Bank of Am. Corp.,*No. 5:09-cv-00938-D (E.D.N.C., June 25, 2010).

We therefore affirm the judgments of the district court. 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.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>    5
<LEGEND>
EXHIBIT 27 - FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1998 AND THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>             6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                      311,915
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                             4,515,214
<ALLOWANCES>                                100,118
<INVENTORY>                                 829,380
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          5,646,317
<PP&E>                                      318,937
<DEPRECIATION>                              175,316
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            7,452,022
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     4,003,743
<BONDS>                                           0
<COMMON>                                      5,923
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                3,267,686
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              7,452,022
<SALES>                                   6,834,553
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          8,127,831
<CGS>                                     4,625,846
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             5,193,411
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          2,451,675
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0     
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           22,640
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             505,385
<INCOME-TAX>                                197,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         308,385
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                308,385
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   .05
                                                          



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                      2,091,400
<SECURITIES>                                  496,700         
<RECEIVABLES>                                  35,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            2,623,100 
<PP&E>                                      7,286,400
<DEPRECIATION>                              1,622,200
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              8,303,900
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         761,500
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                  7,542,400
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                8,303,900
<SALES>                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              872,400
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 474,200 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               38,900
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               227,500
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           227,500
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  227,500
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.41
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 23

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-144885, 333-116799, 333-105398,
333-105397, 333-103556, 333-65332 and 333-59433 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-57301 on
Form S-3 of our report dated February 29, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial statement schedule of Georgia Gulf Corporation
(which report on the consolidated financial statements expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption by Georgia Gulf Corporation of Financial
Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 48,Accounting for Uncertainties in Income Taxes an Interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 109, on January 1, 2007, the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R),Share-Based
Payment, on January 1, 2006, and the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158,Employers' Accounting for Defined
Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans,on December 31, 2006) and our report dated February 29, 2008 relating to the effectiveness of Georgia Gulf
Corporation's internal control over financial reporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Georgia Gulf Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2007.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLPAtlanta, Georgia
February 29, 2008

---



QuickLinks
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Larry Johnson THORNTON, II, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-2972.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: July 31, 2014.

Filed: Aug. 7, 2014.

Matthew C. Quinn, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Texarkana, AR, Benjamin Wulff, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Fort Smith, AR, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee.

Lee Deken Short, James Law Firm, Little Rock, AR, for Defendant-Appellant.

Larry Johnson Thornton, II, Yazoo City, MS, pro se.

Before MURPHY, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Larry Johnson Thornton, II directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pled guilty to distributing marijuana and possessing a firearm during a drug-trafficking offense, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(D), and 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)®. In the plea agreement, Thornton “waive[d] the right to directly appeal the conviction and sentence,” unless his sentence exceeded the statutory maximum. His counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d *493*(1967), arguing that Thornton’s sentence was excessive. The government has moved to dismiss the appeal based on the appeal waiver.

After careful review, this court holds the appeal waiver is valid and shall be enforced. *See United States v. Scott,*627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir.2010) (standard of review); *United States v. Andis,*333 F.3d 886, 889-90 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc) (appeal-waiver rule). Thornton’s appeal falls within the scope of the waiver. The record shows that Thornton knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and appeal waiver, as the court discussed both with Thornton during the plea hearing. Thornton stated that he reviewed the agreement with counsel and understood the agreement and waiver. *See Nguyen v. United States,*114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir.1997) (defendant’s statements during plea hearing carry strong presumption of verity). Enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. *See Andis,*333 F.3d at 891-92 (sentence within statutory range is not miscarriage of justice, and allegation that sentencing court misapplied Guidelines or abused its sentencing discretion is not subject to appeal in face of valid appeal waiver); 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i), (D)(ii); 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(D).

*543An independent review of the record under *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), reveals no nonfrivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver.

The appeal is dismissed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted, subject to counsel informing appellant about the procedures for seeking rehearing from this court and for filing a petition for writ of certiorari.

1

. The Honorable Susan O. Hickey, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003 In connection with the Annual Report of Quiksilver, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
period ending October 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Steven L. Brink, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, that: (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/ Steven L. Brink 
 Steven L. Brink
Chief Financial Officer
January 11, 2005
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED March 25, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-41224 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JUAN CARLOS TRINIDAD-RENOVATO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C-03-CR-83-1

-------------------- Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Juan Carlos Trinidad-Renovato (“Trinidad”) appeals the 64- month sentence that was imposed following entry of his guilty plea to one count of possession with intent to distribute approximately three kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A). Trinidad argues that the district court erroneously denied him a sentence reduction under the Sentencing Guidelines’ safety valve provision, U.S.C.G. 5C1.2.No. 03-41224 - 2 - We review the decision to deny the application of U.S.C.G. § 5C1.2 for clear error. United States v. Flanagan , 80 F.3d 143, 145 (5th Cir. 1996). The safety valve provision, in pertinent part, requires that a defendant, at or before sentencing, provide the Government with all the information and evidence he has concerning his offense. U.S.C.G. § 5C1.2(a)(5). We ordinarily do not disturb a district court’s credibility determinations and see no reason to do so in the instant case.
See United States v. Ridgeway , 321 F.3d 512, 516 (5th Cir. 2003). After reviewing the record, we are convinced that the district court did not clearly err when it denied Trinidad the reduction afforded by the safety valve provision. See Flanagan , 80 F.3d at 145. Trinidad also challenges the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. 841(a) and (b) in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). As Trinidad concedes, his Apprendi argument is foreclosed by United States v. Slaughter , 238 F.3d 580, 582 (5th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
KU, 

# Ote ri



### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 21-0095 & DA 21-0111
Plaintiffand Appellant, v. GREAT FALLS PUBLIC LIBRARY,

Defendant and Appellee. 

# FILED MAR 2 5 2021 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Suprerne Court State of Montana SECOND ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7,and the parties having failed to jointly and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P.,7(4),(c), On March 22, 2021, J. David Slovak was appointed as Mediator. He has since informed this office that he must decline the appointment. ACCORDINGLY, the appointment of Mr. Slovak is rescinded, and: IT IS ORDERED THAT J BRIAN BULGER, whose name appears next on the list of attorneys desiring appointment as rnediators for Money Judgments appeals which is maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5),and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 7(5)(d)shall run from the date ofthis order ofappointment. A true copy ofthis order is being mailed to counsel ofrecord for the parties,or to the parties individually ifnot represented by counsel,on the date hereof. DATED this 25 th day ofMarch,2021.

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk ofthe Supreme Court c: J. David Slovak,J. Brian Bulger,Jada Ku,Jordan Crosby 03/25/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0095
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION 

601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW
 

SUITE 9500
 

WASHINGTON, DC 20001
 

June 21, 2010 

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, July 1, 2010 

PLACE:	 The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, 9th Floor, 601 New Jersey 

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 

STATUS: Open 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED:	 The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open 

session: Secretary of Labor v. Wolf Run Mining Company, Docket 

Nos. WEVA 2006-853, et al. (Issues include whether the 

administrative law judge erred in ruling on alleged violations of the 

regulatory standard requiring the use of lightning arresters in certain 

situations.) 

Any person attending this meeting who requires special accessibility 

features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, 

must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 

29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d). 

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: Jean Ellen (202) 434-9950 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay / 

1-800-877-8339 for toll free.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF DODGE CITY HEALTHCARE GROUP, L.P., FOR THE NINE MONTHS
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,397
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,150
<INVENTORY>                                        982
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,318
<PP&E>                                          20,457
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,807
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  26,546
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              941
<BONDS>                                         12,713
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,892
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    26,546
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,302
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,724
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,650
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,983
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 461
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,724
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,724
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,724
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
</FN>


</TABLE>
(First Circuit — Hamilton Co., O., Circuit Court

Jan. Term, 1898.)

Before Cox, Swing-and Smith, JJ.

#### JOHN B. BOBE v. JOHN RANKIN et al.

*Correction of a real estate mortgage "defectively executed, as -against general*creditors—

Appeal from the Court of Common ' Pleas of Hamilton county.

The plaintiff loaned to Mary A. Rankin $2,400, taking-a mortgage on real estate as security. The mortgage was-*635recorded, but proved to be defective in execution, in that the grantee, who was the agent of the plaintiff and afterward transferred the mortgage to him, was one of the witneses, and also took and certified the acknowledgment as a notary public. Mrs. Rankin died leaving insufficient property to pay her debts. The present suit was brought for correction of the mortgage, which is resisted by the general creditors. At the hearing below Judge Wilson granted a decree making the correction. The circuit court held:

*A. B.*Benedict, for the Plaintiff.

*Marsh*& *Ritchie, Wm. Hartley Pugh, Borman*& *Thompson,*and *Shay & Cogan,*for the General Creditors,

> ‘‘A majority of the court is of the opinion that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief asked.”
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - [Report No. 2521]

Petition for Reconsideration has been filed in the Commission's rulemaking proceeding listed in this Public Notice and published pursuant to 47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of this document is available for viewing and copying in Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International (202) 863-2893. Oppositions to this petition must be filed by January 14, 2002. See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the Commission's rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an opposition must be filed within 10 days after the time for filing oppositions has expired.

*Subject:*                     Amendment of FM Table of Allotment (MM Docket No. 01-107).                

*Number of Petitions Filed:*                     1.                

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-31861  Filed 12-27-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-M