alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### George W. Leavitt, appellee, v. S. D. Mercer Company et al., appellants.

Filed June 5, 1901.

No. 9,710.

Stare Decisis.

Appeal from the district court for Douglas county. Heard below before Keysor, J.

*Affirmed.*

*Albert Swartzlander,*for appellant.

*H. P. Leavitt, contra.*

Per Curiam.

The questions in this case are substantially the same as those in *Green v. Hellman,*61 Nebr., 875, decided herewith, and for the reasons stated in the opinion therein the decree of the district court is

Affirmed.
### §836a. Rules governing issuance of license

The license issued under the terms of this chapter shall be granted in conformance with Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, but in the event of any conflict, the provisions of this chapter shall govern in respect of the project herein authorized.

(Pub. L. 85–159, §2, Aug. 21, 1957, 71 Stat. 402; Pub. L. 95–91, title IV, §402(a)(1)(A), Aug. 4, 1977, 91 Stat. 583.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Transfer of Functions

"Federal Energy Regulatory Commission" substituted for "Federal Power Commission" in subsecs. (a) and (b) pursuant to Pub. L. 95–91, §402(a)(1)(A), which is classified to section 7172(a)(1)(A) of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.

The Federal Power Commission was terminated, and its functions, personnel, property, funds, etc., were transferred to the Secretary of Energy (except for certain functions which were transferred to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) by sections 7151(b), 7171(a), 7172(a), 7291, and 7293 of Title 42.
Holobeam, Inc.
Form 10K
September 30, 2006
Exhibit B
Certification


        Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C., Section 1350 as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

        In connection with the Annual Report of Holobeam, Inc. (The
Registrant) on Form 10K for the fiscal year ended September 30,
2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Melvin S. Cook, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C., Sec. 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Registrant.





/s/ Melvin S. Cook
------------------
MELVIN S. COOK
CHAIRMAN AND PRESIDENT
December 22, 2006





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.





<PAGE>
Holobeam, Inc.
Form 10K
September 30, 2006
Exhibit B
Certification


        Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C., Section 1350 as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

        In connection with the Annual Report of Holobeam, Inc. (The
Registrant) on Form 10K for the fiscal year ended September 30,
2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Ralph A. Fredericks, Treasurer of the
Registrant, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C., Sec. 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Registrant.




/s/ Ralph A. Fredericks
-----------------------
RALPH A. FREDERICKS
TREASURER
December 22, 2006







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.





<PAGE>
### §760–5. Establishment of fish hatchery at Paint Bank, Virginia

The Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed to construct, equip, maintain, and operate a new fish hatchery in the vicinity of Paint Bank, Virginia.

(Aug. 3, 1956, ch. 943, §1, 70 Stat. 1020.)
(54 South. 794.)

No. 18,207.

#### OSTRICA OYSTER CO., Limited, et al. v. BARBIER et al.

(March 27, 1911.)

*(Syllabus by the Court.)*

Courts (§ 224*) — Supreme Couei^-Jurisdictional Amount.

The mere exaggeration of an amount claimed by way of exemplary damages, and added to that claimed as actual damages, does not, of necessity, bring a case within the jurisdiction of this court.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Courts, Dec. Dig. § 224.*]

Appeal from Twenty-Ninth Judicial District Court, Parish of Plaquemines; Robert E. I-Iingle, Judge.

Action by the Ostrica Oyster Company, Limited, and Anthony A. Tomasovich against John Bar bier and others. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal.

Transferred to the Court of Appeal.

James Wilkinson, for appellants. Oliver S. Livaudais, for appellees.

MONROE, J.

The Ostrica Oyster Company, Limited, brought this suit against a *269number, of persons, alleging that they had unlawfully prevented it (the company) from shipping a lot of oysters from the parish of Plaquemines to New Orleans, by reason whereof part of the oysters were lost and other damages were sustained, to the amount, in the aggregate, of $401.22%, to which plaintiff added a claim of $2,000 for exemplary damages. Subsequently Anthony Tomasovich joined with the company as party plaintiff, and after hearing there was judgment in the district court in favor of plaintiffs, and against certain of the defendants, in the sum of $309.75, with interest. The defendants who were cast have appealed, and plaintiffs have answered, praying for an increase in the amount of the award. Our inspection of the record leads us to the conclusion that the claim for exemplary damages is very much exaggerated, and that any amount that plaintiffs could reasonably expect to recover, on that count, added to their claim for actual damages, would leave the amount really involved below $2,000, and hence below the amount necessary to give this court jurisdiction of the appeal.

It is therefore ordered that the appeal in this case be transferred to the Court of Appeal for the parish of Orleans, provided that, before said transfer is made, and within five days after this judgment shall have become final, the appellants, or their attorney of record, shall make oath that their appeal was not taken for the purpose of delay; otherwise, said appeal shall be held dismissed.
From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>

To: Amy Lamson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Keith Barnett/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Schwab, Margo" <Margo_Schwab@omb.e

Date: 08/03/2010 09:15 AM

Subject: Speciation Language

Hi,

This is the speciation language – the attachment shows where it would go in the RICE rule.

“EPA assumes reduction in all species of fine particles have equivalent health benefits, however 

it is important to point out that there is significant uncertainty surrounding this assumption, and 

to the extent that this rule largely reflects reductions in only a couple of species of PM 

precursors, the estimates carry significant degree of uncertainty.”

For the Cement preamble, it would need to be added somewhere around page 272, with specific 

reference to sulfates. In addition, similar language is needed for the first paragraph on page 67.

Regards,

Cortney

________________________________________________

Cortney Higgins

Policy Analyst

OMB/OIRA/NRE

202.395.7856

chiggins@omb.eop.gov
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. ss.1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Solely for the purposes of complying with, and the extent required by 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies, in his capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of BlastGard International, Inc., that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of the company on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2011, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the company’s financial condition and results of operations.





November 14, 2011


/s/ Michael J. GordonMichael J. Gordon, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23(a)

     INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

     We  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in (i) the  Registration
     Statements No. 2-96961 and No. 33-28095 on Form S-8 and related  Prospectus
     of Heilig-Meyers Company relating to Common Stock issued and issuable under
     the 1983 Stock Option Plan of the Company, (ii) the Registration Statements
     No.  33-35263,  No.  33-50086  and No.  33-64616  on Form  S-8 and  related
     Prospectuses of  Heilig-Meyers  Company relating to Common Stock issued and
     issuable  under  the 1990  Stock  Option  Plan of the  Company,  (iii)  the
     Registration   Statement   No.   33-43791  on  Form  S-8  relating  to  the
     Heilig-Meyers  Company Employee Stock Purchase Plan and related  Prospectus
     of the Company, (iv) Registration Statements No. 33-54261 and No. 333-29105
     on Form S-8 and related  Prospectuses of Heilig-Meyers  Company relating to
     Common Stock  issued and  issuable  under the 1994 Stock Option Plan of the
     Company, and (v) the Registration Statements No. 333-07753,  No. 333-29929,
     No. 333-45129, No. 333-320825 and No. 333-64447 on Form S-3 and the related
     Prospectuses of  Heilig-Meyers  Company of our report dated March 24, 1999,
     except  for  note  17,  as to  which  the  date  is June  1,  1999,  on the
     consolidated financial statements and schedule of Heilig-Meyers Company and
     subsidiaries,  as listed under Items 14(a) (1) and (2),  both  appearing in
     the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Heilig-Meyers  Company for the year ended
     February 28, 1999.


      /s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

     Richmond, Virginia
     June 1, 1999


                                       155
<PAGE>
### §747. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, acts Mar. 28, 1922, ch. 117, title I, 42 Stat. 484; Jan. 5, 1923, ch. 24, title I, 42 Stat. 1125; May 28, 1924, ch. 204, title III, 43 Stat. 238; Feb. 27, 1925, ch. 364, title III, 43 Stat. 1047, which related to the commutation of rations of officers and crews on vessels, was provision of an appropriation act which was confined to specific appropriations.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4725 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4725

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
     at 8585 Criterion Drive in Colorado Springs, Colorado, as the 
     ``Chaplain (Capt.) Dale Goetz Memorial Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 17, 2019

Mr. Lamborn (for himself, Mr. Tipton, Mr. Buck, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Crow, 
 Mr. Neguse, and Mr. Perlmutter) introduced the following bill; which 
         was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
     at 8585 Criterion Drive in Colorado Springs, Colorado, as the 
     ``Chaplain (Capt.) Dale Goetz Memorial Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. CHAPLAIN (CAPT.) DALE GOETZ MEMORIAL POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 8585 Criterion Drive in Colorado Springs, Colorado, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Chaplain (Capt.) Dale Goetz Memorial Post 
Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any references in a law, map, regulation, 
document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``Chaplain (Capt.) Dale Goetz Memorial Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 7 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 8 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 9 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 10 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 11 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 12 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 13 of 14
Case 17-30630-KRH Doc 2 Filed 02/08/17 Entered 02/08/17 14:21:07 Desc Main

 Document Page 14 of 14
#### Peggy DAWSON etc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 77-1382.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 11, 1979.

*1293Richard D. Ellenberg, Robert N. Dokson, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellant.

Douglas E. Winter, Theodore Voorhees, Jr., Washington, D. C., for National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People, et al.

Sana F. Shtasel, John Sherman Cooper, Washington, D. C., Florence W. Roisman, Nat’l Housing Law Proj., Washington, D. C., for amicus curiae.

William L. Harper, U. S. Atty., Atlanta Ga., Bruce Forrest, Atty., Ronald R. Glancz, Atty., Barbara A. Babcock, Asst. Atty. Gen., Civil Rts. Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendants-appellees.

Before THORNBERRY, CLARK and RONEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This case involves statutory construction of the Uniform Relocation and Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Policies Act (URA), 42 U.S.C. § 4601, *et seq.*The sole question is whether the government must pay relocation assistance to the plaintiff who was forced to move by a private developer.

The district court found for the government and its opinion is reported at 428 F.Supp. 328 (N.D.Ga.1976). The precise issue presented in this appeal has been decided by the Eighth Circuit in *Moorer v. HUD,*561 F.2d 175 (8 Cir. 1977), *cert. denied,*436 U.S. 919, 98 S.Ct. 2266, 56 L.Ed.2d 760 (1978), with a result favorable to the government. The government has also prevailed in its view of the URA in *Conway v. Harris,*586 F.2d 1137 (7 Cir. 1978).

We have reviewed the arguments presented by the plaintiff in this case and her criticisms of the *Moorer*and *Conway*cases. We nevertheless believe that those cases were correctly decided and affirm the district court.

The plaintiff’s equal protection contention and her argument arising out of 42 U.S.C. § 4637 were also correctly disposed of by the district court in its opinion. 428 F.Supp. at 333.

AFFIRMED.
SUBPOENA TO APPEAR AND TESTIFY AT A DEPOSITION

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 

Issued Pursuant to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Rules of 

Practice 111(b) and 232, 17 C.F.R. §§ 201.111(b), 201.232. 

1. TO: This subpoena requires you to testify at a deposition, at the 

date and time specified in Item 3, at the request of the Party 

and/or Counsel described in Item 5, in this U.S. Securities 

and Exchange Commission Administrative Proceeding 

described in Item 7. 

2. PLACE OF DEPOSITION 3. DATE AND TIME OF DEPOSITION. Should be at least

three weeks after the date of request for the subpoena's issuance, to

provide time for the Commission to act on request.

4. METHOD OF RECORDING DEPOSITION

5. PARTY AND COUNSEL REQUESTING

ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA

6. BEFORE THE U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION. Proceeding is not assigned to an

Administrative Law Judge.

7. TITLE OF THE MATTER AND

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING NUMBER

8. DOCUMENTS OR OTHER ITEMS TO BE PRODUCED

Leave blank if not applicable. Attach pages if needed.

DATE SIGNED SIGNATORY'S NAME AND SIGNATURE

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

MOTION TO QUASH

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Rules of

Practice require that any application to quash or modify a

subpoena comply with Commission Rule of Practice 

232(e)(1), 17 C.F.R. § 201.232(e)(1). 

TRAVEL EXPENSES

Witness fees and mileage will be paid by the party at 

whose instance the witness appears, 17 C.F.R. § 

201.232(f).
### §§5991 to 5995. Repealed. Pub. L. 108–447, div. J, title VIII, §813(d)(2), Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3391

Section 5991, Pub. L. 105–391, title VI, §601, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3518, related to purposes of this subchapter.

Section 5992, Pub. L. 105–391, title VI, §602, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3519, related to establishment of the national park passport program.

Section 5993, Pub. L. 105–391, title VI, §603, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3519; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, §1000(a)(3) [title I, §145], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1535, 1501A–171; Pub. L. 106–176, title III, §306, Mar. 10, 2000, 114 Stat. 33, related to administration of the national park passport program.

Section 5994, Pub. L. 105–391, title VI, §604, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3519, related to foreign sales of Golden Eagle Passports.

Section 5995, Pub. L. 105–391, title VI, §605, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3520, related to effect of the national park passport on other laws and programs.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Dec. 19, 2006, see section 6812(d) of this title.
Exhibit 99.2


        CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
               AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


       In connection with the accompanying Form 10-K of Dover
Investments Corporation for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2002,  I,  Erika Kleczek, Principal Financial Officer of Dover
Investments Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that:

       (1)  such Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
              2002 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 such Form 10-K for the fiscal
              year ended December 31, 2002 fairly presents, in all material
              respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
              Dover Investments Corporation.



Date: March 25, 2003               By: /s/ Erika Kleczek
                                                            Erika Kleczek
                                                            Principal Financial
                                                            Officer
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 197 

Recognizing the roles and contributions of the teachers of the United States 

in building and enhancing the civic, cultural, and economic well-being 

of the United States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 8, 2019 

Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. BROWN, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. WYDEN, Mrs. 

FEINSTEIN, Ms. HARRIS, Ms. ROSEN, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Mr. DURBIN, 

Mr. BLUNT, Ms. HASSAN, Mrs. CAPITO, Mrs. SHAHEEN, Mr. BOOZMAN, 

Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mr. WICKER, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Ms. ERNST, Mr. 

COONS, Mr. DAINES, Mr. CASEY, Mr. HOEVEN, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. BENNET, Mr. KAINE, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. CARPER, Mr. KING, 

Mr. BOOKER, Mr. JONES, and Ms. HIRONO) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the roles and contributions of the teachers of 

the United States in building and enhancing the civic, 

cultural, and economic well-being of the United States. 

Whereas education and knowledge are the foundation of the 

current and future strength of the United States; 

Whereas teachers and other education staff have earned and 

deserve the respect of their students and communities for 

the selfless dedication of the teachers and staff to community service and the futures of the children of the 

United States; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 197 ATS 

Whereas the purposes of National Teacher Appreciation 

Week, celebrated from May 6, 2019, through May 10, 

2019, are— 

(1) to raise public awareness of the unquantifiable 

contributions of teachers; and 

(2) to promote greater respect and understanding 

for the teaching profession; and 

Whereas students, schools, communities, and a number of organizations representing educators are hosting teacher 

appreciation events in recognition of National Teacher 

Appreciation Week: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) thanks the teachers of the United States; 

3 and 

4 (2) promotes the profession of teaching by en5 couraging students, parents, school administrators, 

6 and public officials to participate in teacher appre7 ciation events during National Teacher Appreciation 

8 Week. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
#### § 65.30 General.

The Act requires that applications be submitted in writing, by the chief executive officer of a state, on Standard Form 424, in accordance with these regulations.
### §821. State laws and water rights unaffected

Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed as affecting or intending to affect or in any way to interfere with the laws of the respective States relating to the control, appropriation, use, or distribution of water used in irrigation or for municipal or other uses, or any vested right acquired therein.

(June 10, 1920, ch. 285, pt. I, §27, 41 Stat. 1077; renumbered pt. I, Aug. 26, 1935, ch. 687, title II, §212, 49 Stat. 847.)