alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 549.63 Initial medical evaluation and management. ( a ) Medical staff shall ordinarily perform the following procedures upon initial referral of an inmate on a hunger strike: ( 1 ) Measure and record height and weight;
( 2 ) Take and record vital signs;
( 3 ) Urinalysis;
( 4 ) Psychological and/or psychiatric evaluation;
( 5 ) General medical evaluation;
( 6 ) Radiographs as clinically indicated;
( 7 ) Laboratory studies as clinically indicated.
( b ) Medical staff shall take and record weight and vital signs at least once every 24 hours while the inmate is on a hunger strike. Other procedures identified in paragraph (a) of this section shall be repeated as medically indicated.
( c ) When valid medical reasons exist, the physician may modify, discontinue, or expand any of the medical procedures described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
( d ) When medical staff consider it medically mandatory, an inmate on a hunger strike will be transferred to a Medical Referral Center or to another Bureau institution considered medically appropriate, or to a community hospital.
[45 FR 23365, Apr. 4, 1980, as amended at 59 FR 31883, June 20, 1994]
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the quarterly report of PremierWest Bancorp (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael D. Fowler, the Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 for the period certified. This certification is being furnished solely to comply with the requirements of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any of the Companys filings under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise be deemed to be filed as part of the Report or under such Acts. Date: August 9, 2010
     /s/ Michael D. FowlerMichael D. FowlerChief Financial Officer andPrincipal Accounting Officer


---
### §450bb–6. Change in name of Harpers Ferry National Monument

The Harpers Ferry National Monument established pursuant to sections 450bb to 450bb–2 of this title, shall on and after May 29, 1963, be known as Harpers Ferry National Historical Park, and any law, regulation, document, or record of the United States in which such monument is designated or referred to under the name of Harpers Ferry National Monument shall be held to refer to such monument under and by the name of Harpers Ferry National Historical Park.

(Pub. L. 88–33, May 29, 1963, 77 Stat. 52.)
§ 55.7 Termination of coverage. ( a ) *Section 4(f)(4).* The requirements of section 4(f)(4) apply for a twenty-five-year period following the effective date of the amendments made by the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, Coretta Scott King, César E. Chávez, Barbara C. Jordan, William C. Velásquez, and Dr. Hector P. Garcia Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006, which amendments became effective on July 27, 2006. See section 4(a)(8). A covered State, a political subdivision of a covered State, a separately covered political subdivision, or a political subunit of any of the above, may terminate the application of section 4(f)(4) earlier by obtaining the declaratory judgment described in section 4(a) of the Act.
( b ) *Section 203(c).* The requirements of section 203(c) apply until August 6, 2032. See section 203(b). A covered jurisdiction may terminate Section 203 coverage earlier if it can prove in a declaratory judgment action in a United States district court, that the illiteracy rate of the applicable language minority group is equal to or less than the national illiteracy rate, as described in section 203(d) of the Act.
[Order No. 3291-2011, 76 FR 54111, Aug. 31, 2011]
HECO Exhibit 32.3



Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc.



Written Statement of Chief Executive Officer Furnished Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as Adopted by

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HECO) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the HECO Report), I, T. Michael May, Chief Executive Officer of HECO, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best
of my knowledge, that:



|(1) | The HECO Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | The HECO consolidated information contained in the HECO Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition as of December 31, 2005 and results of
operations for the year ended December 31, 2005 of HECO and its subsidiaries.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ T. Michael May                   
|T. Michael May                       
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date: March 7, 2006                  



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. and will be retained by Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
I Rex Michael Kenny, acting under delegated authority hereby approve SHOTOVER, to: 

• Authorise the construction or modification of remotely piloted aircraft greater than 

15 kg but not more than 30kg, and 

• Inspecting and approving the construction of a remotely piloted aircraft greater than 

15kg but not more than 30kg 

• Authorising the operation of a remotely piloted aircraft greater than 15kg but not more 

than 30kg 

This approval comes into force on 9 November 2015 and remains in force until10 November 

2020 

QK- . 

Rex Mi~hael I~ 

Manager Special Flight Operations and Recreational Aviation. 

10 February 2016
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21
- 7173

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DAVID MERO , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Newport News

. Mark S. Davis, Chief District Judge. ( 4:17

- cr - 00013

- MSD

- RJK

- 1 ; 4:20

- cv - 00038

- MSD )

Submitted : February 17, 2022 Decided: February 22, 2022

Before AGEE and RUSHING , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.
David Mero , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 21-7173 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/22/2022 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIA M: David Mero seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 225 5 motion . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)( B ). 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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists c ould find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis , 137 S. Ct. 759, 773

- 74 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the disposi tive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000))

. Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Mero’s informal brief , we conclude that Mero has not made the requisite showing. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) ( “ The informal brief is an im portant document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief. ” )

. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions a re adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. DISMISSED USCA4 Appeal: 21-7173 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/22/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
###### Editorial Note on Part 1003

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1003 appear at 68 FR 9846, Feb. 28, 2003, and at 68 FR 10350, Mar. 5, 2003.

#### § 1003.30 Additional charges in deportation or removal hearings.

At any time during deportation or removal proceedings, additional or substituted charges of deportability and/or factual allegations may be lodged by the Service in writing. The alien shall be served with a copy of these additional charges and/or allegations and the Immigration Judge shall read them to the alien. The Immigration Judge shall advise the alien, if he or she is not represented by counsel, that the alien may be so represented. The alien may be given a reasonable continuance to respond to the additional factual allegations and charges. Thereafter, the provision of § 1240.10(b) of this chapter relating to pleading shall apply to the additional factual allegations and charges.

[62 FR 10335, Mar. 6, 1997]
### §459e–7. Shore erosion control or beach protection measures; Fire Island inlet

#### (a) Authority of Chief of Engineers

The authority of the Chief of Engineers, Department of the Army, to undertake or contribute to shore erosion control or beach protection measures on lands within the Fire Island National Seashore shall be exercised in accordance with a plan that is mutually acceptable to the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army and that is consistent with the purposes of sections 459e to 459e–9 of this title.

#### (b) Land contribution

The Secretary shall also contribute the necessary land which may be required at any future date for the construction of one new inlet across Fire Island in such location as may be feasible in accordance with plans for such an inlet which are mutually acceptable to the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army and that is consistent with the purposes of sections 459e to 459e–9 of this title.

(Pub. L. 88–587, §8, Sept. 11, 1964, 78 Stat. 932.)
### §430h–9. Authorization of appropriations

There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of sections 430h–6 to 430h–9 of this title.

(Pub. L. 101–442, title I, §104, Oct. 18, 1990, 104 Stat. 1020.)
Helvetica Nueve Ultra Light Condensed

Your flu vaccine protects me. My flu vaccine protects you.

When you get your flu vaccine, you can keep yourself healthy and keep from spreading 

the flu. Protect the circle of life.

For more information, visit 

http://www.flu.gov

CS212299-O
#### Burrell *v.*Lindsey.

February 18, 1910.

Appeal. Before Judge Kimsey. Rabun superior court.

November 24, 1908.

*H. II. Dean*and *W. S. Paris,*for plaintiff in error.

*W. A. Charters, R. E. A. Hamby, Robert McMillan,*and *J. T. Davis,*contra.

Fish, C, J.

There being no complaint that any error of law was committed by the court upon the trial, and the evidence being sufficient to authorize the verdict, the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS RULINGS

Release No. 6861/August 3, 2022

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-20801

In the Matter of :

:

DF GROWTH REIT II, LLC : ORDER

The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted this proceeding with an Order 

Temporarily Suspending Exemption Pursuant to Section 3(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 

258 of Regulation A1 Thereunder and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing on March 16, 2022. 

Respondent DF Growth REIT II, LLC (Respondent or REIT II), requested a hearing, and, on March 

31, 2022, the Commission ordered that the matter be heard by an Administrative Law Judge. On 

May 16, 2022, the proceeding was reassigned to the undersigned. The Division of Enforcement has

filed a Motion for Summary Disposition; Respondent’s response is due on August 15, 2022.

2 On 

August 2, 2022, Respondent filed an Application to Quash Investigatory Subpoenas issued to three 

individuals seeking evidence directly relevant to the instant proceeding. The subpoenas were issued 

by the Division in connection with formal investigation No. LA-5266, In the Matter of 

DiversyFund, Inc. The Division had not notified the undersigned of these investigatory subpoenas. 

See 17 C.F.R. § 201.230(g). Pending responsive filings and the undersigned’s ruling on the 

Application to Quash, compliance with the subpoenas will be stayed. See 17 C.F.R. § 201.232(e).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

/S/ Carol Fox Foelak 

Carol Fox Foelak

Administrative Law Judge

 

1 Regulation A consists of Securities Act Rules: 17 C.F.R. §§ 230.251-263 (Rules 251-263).

2

See DF Growth REIT II, LLC, Admin. Proc. Rulings Release No. 6860, 2022 SEC LEXIS ____, 

(Aug. 1, 2022).
#### § 77.3 Application of 28 U.S.C. 530B.

In all criminal investigations and prosecutions, in all civil investigations and litigation (affirmative and defensive), and in all civil law enforcement investigations and proceedings, attorneys for the government shall conform their conduct and activities to the state rules and laws, and federal local court rules, governing attorneys in each State where such attorney engages in that attorney's duties, to the same extent and in the same manner as other attorneys in that State, as these terms are defined in § 77.2 of this part.
### §410cc–1. Definitions

For purposes of this subchapter—

(1) the term "park" means the Lowell National Historical Park, established by section 410cc–11(a)(1) of this title;

(2) the term "preservation district" means the Lowell Historic Preservation District, established by section 410cc–11(a)(1) of this title;

(3) the term "Commission" means the Lowell Historic Preservation Commission established by section 410cc–31(a) of this title;

(4) the term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior; and

(5) the term "report of the Lowell Historic Canal District Commission" means the report submitted to the Congress by the Lowell Historic Canal District Commission pursuant to an Act entitled "An Act to provide for a plan for the preservation, interpretation development and use of the historic, cultural, and architectural resources of the Lowell Historic Canal District in Lowell, Massachusetts, and for other purposes", approved January 4, 1975 (88 Stat. 2330).

(Pub. L. 95–290, §2, June 5, 1978, 92 Stat. 290.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

An Act entitled "An Act to provide for a plan for the preservation, interpretation development and use of the historic, cultural, and architectural resources of the Lowell Historic Canal District in Lowell, Massachusetts, and for other purposes", approved January 4, 1975 (88 Stat. 2330), referred to in par. (5), is Pub. L. 93–645, Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2330.
§ 750.306 Documentation for Federal participation. The following information concerning each sign must be available in the State's files to be eligible for Federal participation. ( a ) *Payment to sign owner.* ( 1 ) A photograph of the sign in place. Exceptions may be made in cases where in one transaction the State has acquired a number of a company's nominal value signs similar in size, condition and shape. In such cases, only a sample of representative photographs need be provided to document the type and condition of the signs.
( 2 ) Evidence showing the sign was nonconforming as of the date of taking.
( 3 ) Value documentation and proof of obligation of funds.
( 4 ) Satisfactory indication of ownership of the sign and compensable interest therein (e.g., lease or other agreement with the property owner, or an affidavit, certification, or other such evidence of ownership).
( 5 ) Evidence that the sign falls within one of the three categories shown in § 750.302 of this regulation. The specific category should be identified.
( 6 ) Evidence that the right, title, or interest pertaining to the sign has passed to the State, or that the sign has been removed.
( b ) *Payment to the site owner.* ( 1 ) Evidence that an agreement has been reached between the State and owner.
( 2 ) Value documentation and proof of obligation of funds.
( 3 ) Satisfactory indication of ownership or compensable interest.
( c ) In those cases where Federal funds participate in 100 percent of the cost of removal, the State file shall contain the records of the relocation made prior to January 4, 1975.
[39 FR 27436, July 29, 1974, as amended at 41 FR 31198, July 27, 1976]
### §460aaa–3. Acquisition

#### (a) General authority

Subject to the provisions of section 460aaa–2(b)(8) of this title and subsection (b) of this section, the Secretary is authorized and directed to acquire by purchase, gift, exchange, or otherwise, lands, waters, structures, or interests therein, including scenic or other easements, within the boundaries of the national recreation area to further the purposes of this subchapter: Provided, That the Secretary may not acquire any privately owned lands within the national recreation area other than with the consent of the owner so long as the owner agrees to the restrictions contained in subsection (b)(1) of this section and grants the Secretary a right of first refusal as provided in subsection (b)(2) of this section. The Secretary also is authorized and directed to acquire lands or structures by such means on the mainland to the extent necessary for access to and administrative facilities for the national recreation area. In acquiring lands or structures under this subsection, the Secretary is directed to give prompt and careful consideration to any offer to sell land or structures made by an individual, organization, or any legal entity owning property within the boundaries of the national recreation area.

#### (b) Private lands

(1) An owner of unimproved real property within the national recreation area may construct recreational residences that are architecturally compatible with other structures within the national recreation area, as described by the management plan developed pursuant to section 460aaa–6 of this title.

(2) Any privately owned lands, interests in lands, or structures within the national recreation area shall not be disposed of by donation, exchange, sale, or other conveyance without first being offered at no more than fair market value to the Secretary. The Secretary shall be given a period of 120 days to accept an offer and, after such offer is accepted, a period of 45 days after the end of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the offer was accepted to acquire such lands, interests in lands, or structures. No such lands, interests in lands, or structures shall be sold or conveyed at a price below the price at which they have been offered for sale to the Secretary, and if such lands, interest in lands, or structures are reoffered for sale or conveyance they shall first be reoffered to the Secretary, except that this subsection shall not apply to a change in ownership of a property within the immediate family of the owner of record on January 1, 1989. For the purposes of this subsection, the term "immediate family" means, with respect to any such owner of record, the spouse, siblings, children (whether natural or adopted), stepchildren, and lineal descendants of that owner.

(Pub. L. 101–292, §4, May 17, 1990, 104 Stat. 187.)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

November 23, 2021

In the Matter of

Instadose Pharma Corp.,

File No. 500-1

ORDER OF SUSPENSION OF

TRADING

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that the public interest and the 

protection of investors require a suspension in the trading of the securities of Instadose Pharma 

Corp. (“Instadose Pharma”) (CIK No. 0001697587), a Nevada corporation whose principal place 

of business is listed as Chesapeake, Virginia, because of questions and concerns regarding the 

adequacy and accuracy of information about Instadose Pharma in the marketplace, including: 

(1) significant increases in the stock price and share volume unsupported by the company’s 

assets and financial information; (2) trading that may be associated with individuals related to a 

control person of Instadose Pharma; and (3) the operations of Instadose Pharma’s Canadian 

affiliate. As of November 19, 2021, the common stock of Instadose Pharma was quoted and 

traded on OTC Link whose parent company is OTC Markets Group Inc., under the symbol 

INSD, had seven market makers, and was eligible for the “piggyback” exception of Rule 15c2-

11(f)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”).

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors 

require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company.
2

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Exchange Act, that 

trading in the securities of the above-listed Company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. 

EST on November 24, 2021, through 11:59 p.m. EST on December 8, 2021.

By the Commission.

Vanessa A. Countryman

 Secretary
Diane Kearns-Osterweil

3921 Greystone Dr.

Austin, TX 78731

512-799-1221

dikearns@aol.com

April 3, 2014

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Operations, M-30

West Building ground floor,

Room W12-140

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington , DC 20590

RE: Request to extend exemption docket number FAA-2012-0742

This letter is to request an extension for the exception granted in 2012 for Dean Osterweil to be 

able to use an FAA Approved Child Restraint System even though he exceeds the weight limits 

for the CRS. The exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b) enables Dean to use a CARES seat belt 

system while travelling on any commercial air carrier.

Dean Osterweil's physical condition is as follows: diagnosis of cerebral palsy and unable to walk, 

stand, or sit without assistance. He uses a pediatric wheelchair for mobility. Dean is 48” tall and 

is currently weighs 52 pounds. As a result of his physical condition, he needs the support and 

security provided by an FAA Approved Child Restraint, but because of his height & weight is 

incapable of compliance with the regulation. 

I request that the processing of extension request not be delayed for publication and comment in 

the Federal Register. If it is necessary to put a summary in the Federal Register, I submit the 

following: 

This is a request for an exemption from FAR 121.311 (b) to the extent required for a child to use 

an FAA Approved Child Restraint System on an aircraft, even though the child exceeds the 

height & weight limits for the CRS. Due to physical challenges, without the support and security 

of this FAA Approved Child Restraint System, this child would be unable to fly. We request that 

this child be allowed to occupy an FAA Approved Child Restraint (CARES, manufactured by 

AmSafe, Inc.), even though he exceeds the manufacturer’s weight limits of 44 pounds. In this 

case, the safety of this child is greatly enhanced by the extra support and security that the FAA 

Approved Restraint System will provide for him during the flight.

Sincerely,

Diane Kearns-Osterweil