alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 29 (Monday, February 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 9849]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3519]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[DA 01-188]


Process to Update the International Bureau's Records for Carriers 
That Provide International Telecommunications Services, Correction

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to the Notice which was 
published in the Federal Register on Monday, February 5, 2001 (66 FR 
8972). The date announcing the commencement of the 90-day period was 
incorrect. This document corrects that error.

DATES: The 90-day filing period commences on February 5, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Secretary, 445 12th 
Street, SW., Room TW-B204F, Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Arbogast, International 
Bureau, (202) 418-1460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FCC published a document in the Federal 
Register on February 5, 2001 (66 FR 8972). In that document (page 8972, 
column 2) and (page 8973 column 2), the dates for the commencement of 
the 90-day period are incorrect. The correct date is February 5, 2001.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-3519 Filed 2-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
June 13, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

EX PARTE RAHUL SUDHAKAR

NO. 14-11-00701-CR 

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. The 

record reveals error in the judgment. We therefore order that the trial court’s order 

granting habeas corpus be REVERSED and appellee’s plea of nolo contendere 

REINSTATED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1077

THEODORE JUSTICE, for Son,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

DR. TIMOTHY FARLEY, Granville County School Superintendent; 

MARY WATSON, Director Exceptional Children; AUGUSTUS B. 

ELKINS, Administrative Law Judge; HONORABLE JULIAN MANN, 

III, Administrative Law Judge; AMY MILLER, Program Director 

Exceptional Children; MICHAEL ALLEN, Director Exceptional 

Children; KATHY TWISDALE, Principal Stovall Shaw 

Elementary; ROBYNN WILLIAMS, Special Education Teacher; 

JAMES E. CROSS, JR., Attorney Granville County Schools; 

DALE W. HENSLEY, Attorney Granville County Schools; KATE 

NEALE, Consultant for Dispute Resolution Department of 

Public Instruction Exceptional Children Division; JULIE 

RICHARDS, Clerk of Court,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, 

Chief District Judge. (5:13-cv-00343-D)

Submitted: April 24, 2014 Decided: April 29, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Theodore Justice, Appellant Pro Se. John Graham Corriher, 

Kenneth Alexander Soo, THARRINGTON SMITH LLP, Raleigh, North 

Carolina; Laura Ellen Crumpler, Susannah Porter Holloway, NORTH 

CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; 

Tiffany Y. Lucas, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH 

CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Theodore Justice appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his complaint raising claims under the Individuals 

with Disabilities Education Act, Section 504 of the

Rehabilitation Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(2) (2012) and the 

United States Constitution. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. Justice v. Farley, No. 

5:13-cv-00343-D (E.D.N.C. Jan. 21, 2014). We grant leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis. 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.

AFFIRMED
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Chandra Corporation d/b/a Diamond Marquise v. Atashi Jewels, Inc.

d/b/a 7 Elements, Atit Patel and Neeta Patel

Appellate case number: 01

- 22

- 00270

- CV

Trial court case number: 18

- DCV

- 250844

Trial court: 458th District Court of Fort Bend County

T his appeal is stayed pursuant to the Suggestion of Bankruptcy, advising the court that a

bankruptcy petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code was filed by appe llant Chandra

Corporation d/b/a Diamond Marquise on October 3, 2022 (case number 22

- 17386 filed in the

Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey) See 11 U.S.C. § 362 (automatic stay in

bankruptcy).

Until appellant or appellees notify the court that the b ankruptcy has been concluded and

move to reinstate the case, the court will take no further action other than to receive and hold any

documents tendered during the period of suspension. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 8.2.

Unless a party successfully moves to reinstate or sever, this appeal will be an inactive case

on the court’s docket. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 8.3.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

______ /s/ Richard Hightower

__________  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __ October 11, 2022

____
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

**OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,United States Code), I, James T. Sartain, President and Chief Executive Officerof FirstCity Financial Corporation (“registrant”), certify, to the best of myknowledge and belief, that:

 

(1)     the Quarterly Report of the registrant onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 (“Form 10-Q”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)     the information contained in the Form 10-Qfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.

 

 
| Date: August 13, 2009 | /s/ James T. Sartain                     |
|----------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                       | James T. Sartain                         |
|                       | *President and**Chief Executive Officer* |

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Qpursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not beingfiled as part of the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated byreference into any filing of the registrant, whether made before or after thedate hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 2, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 107-108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-32224]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act

    Notice is hereby given that on December 20, 2001 a proposed Consent 
Decree (``Decree'') in United States v. Conoco, Inc. Civil Action No. 
01-2478, was lodged with the United States District Court for the 
District of Colorado.
    The proposed consent resolves claims for civil penalties and 
permanent injunctive relief for violation of the National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (``NESHAP'') requirements of 
section 112 of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7412, and the implementing 
regulations pertaining to petroleum refineries found at 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart CC, at Conoco's petroleum refinery located at 5801 Brighton 
Blvd. in Commerce City, Co.
    Under the terms of the decree Conoco will pay a civil penalty of 
$38,775.20, and comply with all performance test and reporting 
requirements applicable

[[Page 108]]

to the flares. Conoco will also complete two supplemental environmental 
projects, at a cost of no less than $130,000.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the Decree. 
Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, Denver Field Office, 999 
18th Street, Suite 945NT, Denver, Co 80202, and should refer to United 
States v. Conoco, Inc., D.J. Ref. 90-5-2-1-07295.
    The Decree may be examined at the offices of the EPA Library, EPA 
Region VIII, located at 999 18th Street, First Floor, Denver, Colorado 
80202. A copy of the Decree may also be obtained by mail from the 
Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, 
Washington, DC 20044-7611. In requesting a copy of the Decree, please 
enclose a check payable to the Consent Decree Library for $8.50 for a 
complete copy of the decree (25 cents per page, reproduction cost).

Robert Brook,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment 
and Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 01-32224 Filed 12-31-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
Glynn F. Voisin selected as Chief Administrative Law 

Judge of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

 

As of September 30, 2019, Judge Glynn F. Voisin is the new Chief Administrative Law 

Judge of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission. The Commission is an 

independent adjudicatory agency that provides nationwide administrative trial and appellate 

review of legal disputes arising under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as 

amended, with headquarters and branch office in Washington, D.C. and branch offices in 

Denver, Colorado and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The Chief Administrative Law Judge (CALJ) is 

head of the Division of Judges and is solely responsible for the management and general 

administrative supervision of the CALJ office and the three branch offices to ensure the most 

expeditious and thorough conduct of proceedings coming before the Division. 

“Our Commissioners were unanimous in offering Judge Voisin the position as our new 

Chief Administrative Law Judge,” announced Chairman Marco Rajkovich. “He is a proven 

leader, well respected among his peers, and well posed to lead the Office of Administrative Law 

Judges forward.”
Immediately prior to this position, Judge Voisin served as the Supervisory Administrative 

Law Judge, Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals in the Department of Health and Human 

Services in New Orleans, Louisiana. For the last 14 years, he has served as a Social Security 

Administration, Office of Hearings Operations administrative law judge (ALJ). In that position, 

he served in various leadership roles, including New Orleans Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge (8+ years) and Acting Regional Chief Administrative Law Judge in 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 2007-2008.

Judge Voisin also served 28 years in the United States Marine Corps Reserve, with four 

years of active duty and 24 years of reserve duty, including tours in Vietnam and Desert Storm. 

In 1997, he retired from the Marine Corps Reserve as a Lieutenant Colonel. During his Marine 

Corps career, he received two Presidential Certificates of Appreciation for Service in the Armed 

Forces and numerous other medals, citations, and decorations. 

Judge Voisin graduated from Nicholls State University in 1970 and from Tulane 

University School of Law, with honor, in 1977. He is also a graduate of Louisiana State 

University Public Management Program, from which he received his Certificate of Supervisory 

Techniques and designation as a Certified Public Manager in 1998. Prior to his distinguished 

service as a federal judge, Judge Voisin served as a Terrebonne Parish assistant district attorney, 

the Terrebonne Parish Chief Indigent Defender, a Louisiana assistant attorney general and 12 

years as a Louisiana Workers’ Compensation Judge. He also serves as an adjunct instructor at 

Tulane University and has been approved to serve as an adjunct professor at Loyola University 

School of Law.
THE ATJXBRNEY GENERAL 

OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN.TEXAR 78711 

April 14, 1976 

The Honorable Clayton T. Garrison Opinion No.'H-907 

Executive Director 

Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept. Re: Whether redfish of 

.John Ii. Reagan Building 

Austin,,Te%as 78701~ 

less than fourteen inches 

may.be lawfully possessed 

on board a licensed commercial shrimp boats. 

Deer Mr. Garrison: 

You have requested our opinionregarding whether redfish 

of less than 14 inches may be lawfully possessed aboard a 

licensed commercial shrimp boat. 

Section 66.201 of the new Parks and Wildlife Code provides: 

(a) No person may take from public water 

and retain, or place in a boat, creel, 

live-box, or other container or on a 

stringer, a redfish less than 14 inches 

long. 

(b) A person who violates this section is 

guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction 

is punishable by a fine of not less than 

$25 nor more than $200. 

Prior to its inclusion in the Parks and Wildlife Code, this 

provision appeared in the Penal Code as article 931a. 

The minimum length of redfish is also declared to be 14 

inches in another portion of the Parks and Wildlife Code, 

section 47.034(c), which deals with maximum and minimum length 

of a number of varieties of fish. In 1975, the Legislature 

added the following proviso to that section: 

p.3405 
The Honorable Clayton T. Garrison - page 2 (H-807) 

The possession of saltwater species of 

fish of greater or lesser length than 

set out in Subsection (c) of this section 

on board a licensed commercial shrimp 

boat engaged in the taking of shrimp or 

returning to port after taking shrimp is 

not a violation of this section. Parks 

and Wildlife Code S 47.034(e). 

Thus, for purposes of section 47.034, a licensed commercial 

shrimp boat may lawfully possess redfish of less than 14 

inches. Since seation 66.201 of the Code prescribes the 

same minimum length as to redfish, it is our opinion that the 

exception of section 47.034 is equally applicable to section 

66.201. Accordingly( redfish of less than 14 inches may be 

lawfully possessed aboard a licensed commercial shrimp boat. 

SUMMARY 

Redfish of less than 14 inches may be 

lawfully possessed aboard a licensed 

commercial shrimp boat. 

ry truly yours, 

of Texas 

&PROVED: 

jwb 

p.3406
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION 

TIME AND DATE: 

PLACE: 

STATUS: 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED: 

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: 

601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW 

SUITE9500 

WASHINGTON, DC 20001 

October 19,2011 

10:00 a.m., Wednesday, October 19, 2011 

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

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

Open 

The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open 

session: White Buck Coal Co., Docket No. WEV A 2011-1361; 

H & K Materials, Inc., Docket No. PENN 2011-308-M; and 

Graymont (PA) Inc., Docket No. PENN 2011-258-M. (Issues 

include whether motions to reopen each of the cases should be 

granted.) 

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.P.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and§ 2706.160(d). 

Jean Ellen (202) 434-9950 I (202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay I 

1-800-877-8339 for toll free.
EXHIBIT
10.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
  FIRM

We
  consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms
  S-8 Nos. 333-120841; 333-109915; 333-91330; 333-11530; 333-09134; 333-06098)
  of Aladdin Knowledge Systems Ltd. of our report dated June 27, 2006 with respect
  to the consolidated financial statements of Aladdin Knowledge Systems Ltd. and
  subsidiaries included in its Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December
  31, 2005 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

| |                                     
| | ------------------------------------
| | /s/ KOST FORER GABBAY AND
  KASIERER
| |                                     
| | KOST FORER GABBAY AND KASIERER      
| | A Member of Ernst & Young Global    

Tel-Aviv, Israel
June 27, 2006

---
As of May 1, 1996







Exhibit 10(A)(5)







[Servotronics, Inc. Letterhead]







 



 



August 4, 2006







Nicholas D. Trbovich, Jr.



28 Tanglewood Drive, West



Orchard Park, NY 14127







Dear Mr. Nicholas D. Trbovich, Jr.:







You and Servotronics, Inc. (the "Company") are parties to an Amended Employment Agreement, dated July 1, 2005 and ratified on June 30, 2006 (the Amended "Agreement") pursuant to which you are employed by the Company.  This letter confirms such Amended "Agreement" and subsequent ratification.







This letter will also confirm your agreement and that of the Company (pursuant to a resolution of the Board of Directors passed at a meeting held on June 30, 2006) to amend Paragraph 3 of the Amended Agreement to delete "$182,000" and insert in its place "$188,820" (to be effective May 1, 2006) subject to your acceptance which will be indicated by your signature below.







If the foregoing meets with your approval and you are willing to become bound hereby, will you please sign and return to the undersigned the enclosed copy of this letter.







Very truly yours,







SERVOTRONICS, INC.







/s/ Michael D. Trbovich







Michael D. Trbovich,



Corporate Secretary







 



ACCEPTED AND AGREED







	


/s/ Nicholas D. Trbovich, Jr.



Nicholas D. Trbovich, Jr.
	


August 4, 2006



Date
Exhibit
      10.1


    AMENDMENT
      TO THE

     KERYX
      BIOPHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 

    2004
      LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN

    


    This
      Amendment (“Amendment”) is made and executed this 11th
      day of
      April, 2006, to be effective as of the date hereof.

    


    WHEREAS,
      the
      Company previously has adopted the Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. 2004 Long-Term
      Incentive Plan (the “Plan”); and

    


    WHEREAS,
      the
      Board of Directors of the Company has duly authorized and approved the amendment
      of Section 13.4 so that participants may transfer certain awards under the
      Plan;


    


    NOW,
      THEREFORE,
      in
      accordance with Section 15 of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended as
      follows:

    


    1. The
      Plan
      hereby is amended by deleting Section 13.4 in its entirety and substituting
      the
      following:

    


    No
      right
      or interest of a Participant in any unexercised or restricted Award may be
      pledged, encumbered, or hypothecated to or in favor of any party other than
      the
      Company or an Affiliate, or shall be subject to any lien, obligation, or
      liability of such Participant to any other party other than the Company or
      an
      Affiliate. No unexercised or restricted Award shall be assignable or
      transferable by a Participant other than by will or the laws of descent and
      distribution or, except in the case of an Incentive Stock Option, pursuant
      to a
      domestic relations order that would satisfy Section 414(p)(1)(A) of the Code
      if
      such Section applied to an Award under the Plan; provided, however, that the
      Committee may (but need not) permit other transfers where the Committee
      concludes that such transferability (i) does not result in accelerated taxation,
      (ii) does not cause any Option intended to be an Incentive Stock Option to
      fail
      to be described in Code Section 422(b), and (iii) is otherwise appropriate
      and
      desirable, taking into account any factors deemed relevant, including without
      limitation, state or federal tax or securities laws applicable to transferable
      Awards.

    


    The
      provisions of the Plan, as heretofore amended, shall remain in full force and
      effect.

    


    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by its
      duly authorized officer as of the date first above written.

     

    


    
      	 	KERYX BIOPHARMACEUTICALS,
              INC.
	 	 
	 	By: /s/ Michael S. Weiss
	 	Name: Michael S. Weiss
	 	Title: Chairman and
              CEO
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Juan ORTIZ, also known as Nano, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-0241-cr.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Dec. 17, 2010.

Harold H. Chen, Assistant United States Attorney (David B. Fein, United States Attorney, Elizabeth A. Latif, Assistant United States Attorney, of counsel), District of Connecticut, for United States.

Robert C. Mirto, Law Offices of Mirto & Rasile, LLC, West Haven, CT, for Juan Ortiz.

Present: ROSEMARY S. POOLER, B.D. PARKER, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

Juan Ortiz appeals from a judgment of conviction entered by the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Hall, *J.)*on January 20, 2010. Ortiz pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, and to distribute, 50 grams or more of crack cocaine. The district court imposed the mandatory minimum sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) of 120 months in prison and five years of supervised release, and ordered Ortiz to pay a $100 special assessment. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues presented on appeal.

Ortiz appeals on a single issue: that the parsimony clause in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) conflicts with the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions in Section 841(b). However, a prior panel of this Court rejected this argument as a matter of law. *United States v. Samas,*561 F.3d 108, 110-11 (2d Cir.2009) (per curiam) (holding *545that Section 3553(a) “cannot be understood to authorize courts to sentence below minimums specifically prescribed by Congress” in Section 841(b)) (citation and quotation marks omitted). This remains the law of the Circuit, unless it is “overruled either by an en banc panel of our Court or by the Supreme Court.” *United States v. Wilkerson,*361 F.3d 717, 732 (2d Cir.2004).

We have considered all of Ortiz’s arguments and find them to be without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
NUMBER 13-14-00622-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN THE INTEREST OF J.P.A. III, L.K.S., C.S.S. II, G.E.O.S., CHILDREN

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

of Calhoun County, Texas.

ORDER TO FILE APPELLANT’S BRIEF

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza

Order Per Curiam

On October 20, 201 4, M.H.S. and C.S., parents of J.P.A. III, L.K.S., C.S.S. II, 

G.E.O.S., filed a notice of appeal in this parental termination case. M.H.S. filed an

extension of time to file her appellate brief. We granted that extension until January 23, 

2015. C.S.’s brief was due on December 11, 2014. C.S. has filed no brief and has 

requested no extension of time to file his brief. This Court requires strict adherence to 

the briefing rules in appeals of parental termination cases and looks with disfavor upon 

this delay.
2

Now on the 78th day of this appeal, appellant C.S. is hereby ORDERED to file his

appellate brief with this Court on or before January 23, 2015. Any extension of time will 

not be favorably entertained by this Court, absent extraordinary circumstances.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 6th

day of January, 2015.