alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1639.6 Contracting for collection services. The Board will use the services of a private collection contractor where it determines that such use is in the best interest of the Board. When the Board determines that there is a need to contract for collection services, it will— ( a ) Retain sole authority to: ( 1 ) Resolve any dispute by the debtor regarding the validity of the debt;
( 2 ) Compromise the debt;
( 3 ) Suspend or terminate collection action;
( 4 ) Refer the debt to the Department of Justice for litigation; and
( 5 ) Take any other action under this part which does not result in full collection of the debt;
( b ) Require the contractor to comply with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, to the extent specified in 5 U.S.C. 552a(m), with applicable Federal and State laws pertaining to debt collection practices (e.g., the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. 1692 *et seq.*)), and with applicable regulations of the Board;
( c ) Require the contractor to account accurately and fully for all amounts collected; and
( d ) Require the contractor to provide to the Board, upon request, all data and reports contained in its files relating to its collection actions on a debt.
December 4, 2014



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

RENA ABEL , Appellant

NO. 14

- 13

- 00105

- CV V.

ALEXANDER OIL COMPAN Y , Appellee

________ ________________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Alexander Oil Company, signed February 5, 2013, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find error in the judgment. We therefore REV ERSE IN PART and RENDER j udgment that appellee Alexander Oil Company take nothing against appellant Rena Abel. The remainder of the judgment is AFFIRMED. We order appellee, Alexander Oil Company, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further ord er this decision c ertified below for observance.
§ 293.306 Use of existing folders upon transfer or reemployment. When an agency hires a person who has served on or after April 1, 1947, in a position subject to this part, it shall request the transfer of the OPF pertaining to the person's employment. The folder so obtained shall be used in lieu of establishing a new OPF. In the event that the prior service occurred wholly before April 1, 1947, the agency shall request any files or records that may be located in the Federal records storage center. The request shall note that because of the dates of service there will likely be no OPF. Any such file or record found for this individual shall be incorporated into the OPF being established for the employee. ( a ) When a person for whom an OPF has been established transfers from one agency to another, the last employing (losing) agency shall, on request, transfer the OPF to the new employing agency.
( b ) Before transferring the Official Personnel Folder, the losing agency shall: ( 1 ) Remove those records of a temporary nature filed on the left side of the folder, except for PMRS employees' performance ratings of record including the performance plan on which the most recent rating was based;
( 2 ) Transfer performance ratings of record and the performance plan on which the most recent rating was based from the Employee Performance File of PMRS employees to their Official Personnel Folder, if the ratings and plans are not maintained by the agency in the Official Personnel Folder; and
( 3 ) Ensure that all permanent documents of the folder are complete, correct, and present in the folder in accordance with the Guide to Personnel Recordkeeping.
[50 FR 3309, Jan. 24, 1985, as amended at 50 FR 35494, Aug. 30, 1985; 66 FR 66709, Dec. 27, 2001]
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.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on September 17, 2004, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative                           ( print page 64105)                        Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), DSL Forum (“DSLF”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.                

Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization is: DSL Forum, Fremont, CA. The nature and scope of DSLF's standards development activities are: To support the rapid advancement of end-end network systems employing DSL in a manner that promotes a competitive DSL marketplace. The Corporation's activities will include: Promoting global development of DSL systems technology; identifying global DSL applications and corresponding services; providing global educational services; promoting nationwide and worldwide compatibility and interoperability; encouraging input to appropriate national and international standards bodies; and identifying, selecting, augmenting as appropriate, and publishing DSL—centric equipment specifications drawn from appropriate national and international standards.

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 04-24572 Filed 11-2-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 03-3114

___________ United States of America, * * Plaintiff-Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of North Dakota William Duran See Walker, also * known as Billy See Walker, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Defendant-Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: March 8, 2004 Filed: March 11, 2004

___________ Before MURPHY, HEANEY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. William Duran See Walker was charged in a four count superceding indictment with having sexually abused his girlfriend's eight year old daughter, S.C. The indictment charged that he (1) knowingly engaged in contact between his penis and S.C.'s vulva, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c) and 1153; (2) intentionally touched S.C.'s genitalia, not through the clothing, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c) and 1153; (3) intentionally touched S.C.'s genitalia, groin, breast, and buttocks directly and through the clothing, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2244(a)(1), 2244(c), and 1153; and (4) knowingly engaged in contact between his mouth and S.C.'s vulva, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c) and 1153. A jury found See Walker guilty on1 The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota. -2- counts two and three, but acquitted him on counts one and four. The district court 1 sentenced him to 360 months. See Walker appeals his conviction on count two, arguing that the government presented insufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that he had engaged in direct contact with S.C.'s genitalia. In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury's verdict, giving it the benefit of all reasonable inferences. United States v. Oleson , 310 F.3d 1085, 1088 (8th Cir. 2002). A jury's verdict will be reversed only where no reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id

. The victim testified that starting in the late summer of 2002 See Walker gave her "bad touches" on multiple occasions. With the aid of anatomical diagrams, S.C. testified that See Walker touched her breasts with his hands and her vaginal area with his mouth and penis. She testified that See Walker's penis had touched the inside of her "private" and that it "[h]urt really bad." Although a physical examination of the child some months after these events turned up no indications of sexual abuse, expert testimony established that the pain claimed by the victim would be consistent with pain caused by a penis pressing against, but not rupturing, the hymen of an eight year old girl. The jury also properly received evidence that See Walker had been convicted in 1998 of touching the vulva of a four year old girl with his mouth. After reviewing the record, we conclude that a jury could reasonably infer from S.C's testimony and the other evidence presented at trial that See Walker directly touched S.C.'s genitalia, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c) and 1153. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

________________________
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, Joseph Lloyd McAdams, certify that: 

 

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Anworth Mortgage Asset Corporation; 

 

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

 

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

 

4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared; 

 

(b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a)  All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b)  Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Dated: March 8, 2004
### §1603. Vessels subject to International Regulations

Except as provided in section 1604 of this title and subject to the provisions of section 1605 of this title, the International Regulations, as proclaimed under section 1602 of this title, shall be applicable to, and shall be complied with by—

(1) all vessels, public and private, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, while upon the high seas or in waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels, and

(2) all other vessels when on waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

(Pub. L. 95–75, §4, July 27, 1977, 91 Stat. 309.)
Editorial Note on Part 352
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 352 appear at 69 FR 2050, Jan. 13, 2004.

§ 352.205a Authority to return employee to his or her former or successor agency. The transfer of an employee with a grant of reemployment rights under this subpart authorizes the return of the employee to his or her former or successor agency without regard to part 351, 752, or 771 of this chapter when the employee is reemployed in his or her former or successor agency— ( a ) Without a break in service of 1 workday or more in a position at the same or higher grade in the same occupational field and geographical area as the position he or she last held in the former or successor agency; and
( b ) At not less than the rate of pay he or she would have been receiving in the position last held in the former or successor agency if he or she had not been transferred.
[51 FR 25187, July 11, 1986]
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32.1

           CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Planet Polymer Technologies,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, H. M. Busby, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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 results of operations of the
Company.

Date: August 16, 2004

/s/ H. M. Busby
-------------------------------
H. M. Busby
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
#### § 362.103 Authority.

An agency may make an appointment under this part to a position defined in § 213.3402 of this chapter, provided a Memorandum of Understanding between the head of the agency or his or her designee and OPM is in effect.
### §701t. Emergency fund for flood damage; amount; commitments to be fulfilled by local interests

The sum of $25,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated as an emergency fund to be expended under the direction of the Secretary of the Army and the supervision of the Chief of Engineers for the repair, restoration, and strengthening of levees and other flood control works which have been threatened or destroyed by recent floods, or which may be threatened or destroyed by later floods, including the raising, extending, or other modification of such works as may be necessary in the discretion of the Chief of Engineers for the adequate functioning of the works for flood control: Provided, That local interests shall provide without cost to the United States all lands, easements, and rights of way necessary for the work and shall maintain and operate all the works after completion in a manner satisfactory to the Chief of Engineers: Provided further, That pending the appropriation of said sum, the Secretary of the Army may allot from existing flood-control appropriations such sums as may be necessary for the immediate prosecution of the work authorized by this section, such appropriations to be reimbursed from said emergency fund when appropriated: And provided further, That funds allotted under this authority shall not be diverted from the unobligated funds from the appropriation "Flood control, general", made available in War Department Civil Functions Appropriation Acts for specific purposes.

(June 30, 1948, ch. 771, title II, §208, 62 Stat. 1182.)
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**SARBANES-OXLEY**

**SECTION 302CERTIFICATION**

 

I, EdwardM. Krell, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of Mothers Work, Inc.;

 

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

 

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

 

4.             The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)  designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)  evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

c)  disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of theinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors:

 

a)  all significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

b)  any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| August 16, 2004 |                                                | **/s/ EDWARD M. KRELL** |   |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
| Date            | Edward M. Krell                                     |                    |
| * *        | *Executive Vice  President-Chief Financial Officer* | * *                |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SIMIONE CENTRAL HOLDINGS, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTH
PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      19,530,966
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               10,099,302
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,278,312
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            29,068,535
<PP&E>                                       3,021,927
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,098,094
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,383,153
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,780,559
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,501
<OTHER-SE>                                  26,302,608
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                36,383,153
<SALES>                                     34,776,714
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            34,776,714
<CGS>                                       16,131,302
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,131,302
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            16,194,580
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             185,702
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,511,360
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,511,360
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,511,360
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.33
        

</TABLE>
FILED: August 1 2 , 2022

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20

- 6848

MARC PIERRE HALL

,

Plaintiff

– Appell ant

,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

,

Defendant

– Appell ee

.

O R D E R

The Court amends its opinion filed on August 10

, 20 2 2

, as follows:

On page 2, the page number is added to the bottom of the page.

On page 5, in the citation from Jones v. Bock , the single quotation mark after “of”

is changed to a double quotation mark, and the double quotation mark after “succeed” is

deleted.

For the Court

– By Direction

/s/ Patricia S. Connor , Clerk USCA4 Appeal: 20-6848 Doc: 39 Filed: 08/12/2022 Pg: 1 of 1
#### Janet E. Reichman, Respondent, v. Milton Bruenn, Appellant.

No opinion. Present—Townley, Glennon, Untermyer, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 4740

_____________________________ A NTHONY A NTWAN P RINCE , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Mark Borello , Judge

. June 11, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. R AY , B ILBREY , and J AY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Kasey Lacey, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appe llee.