alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §618. Promulgation of charges for electrical energy

The Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed to, and he shall, promulgate charges, or the basis of computation thereof, for electrical energy generated at Hoover Dam beginning June 1, 1937, computed to be sufficient, together with other net revenues from the project, to accomplish the following purposes:

(a) To meet the cost of operation and maintenance, and to provide for replacements, of the project beginning June 1, 1937;

(b) To repay to the Treasury, with interest, the advances to the Colorado River Dam Fund for the project made prior to June 1, 1937, within fifty years from that date (excluding advances allocated to flood control by section 617a(b) of this title, which shall be repayable as provided in section 618f of this title), and such advances made on and after June 1, 1937, over fifty-year periods;

(c) To provide $600,000 for each of the years and for the purposes specified in section 618a(c) of this title;

(d) To provide $500,000 for each of the years and for the purposes specified in section 618a(d) of this title; and

(e) To provide, by application of the increments to rates specified in section 403(c)(2) of the Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968, as amended and supplemented [43 U.S.C. 1543(c)(2)], revenues, from and after June 1, 1987, for application to the purposes there specified.

Such charges may be made subject to revisions and adjustments at such times, to such extent, and in such manner, as by the terms of their promulgation the Secretary shall prescribe.

(July 19, 1940, ch. 643, §1, 54 Stat. 774; Apr. 30, 1947, ch. 46, 61 Stat. 56; Pub. L. 98–381, title I, §104(a)(1)–(3), Aug. 17, 1984, 98 Stat. 1334.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1984—Pub. L. 98–381, §104(a)(1), substituted "beginning June 1, 1937" for "during the period beginning June 1, 1937, and ending May 31, 1987" in provisions preceding subsec. (a).

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 98–381, §104(a)(1), substituted "beginning June 1, 1937" for "during the period beginning June 1, 1937, and ending May 31, 1987".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–381, §104(a)(2), substituted "and such advances made on or after June 1, 1937, over fifty-year periods" for "and such portion of such advances made on or after June 1, 1937, as (on the basis of repayment thereof within such fifty-year period or periods as the Secretary may determine) will be repayable prior to June 1, 1987".

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 98–381, §104(a)(3), added subsec. (e).

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

#### Change of Name

Act Apr. 30, 1947, changed name of Boulder Dam back to Hoover Dam.

#### Construction With Other Laws

Pub. L. 98–381, title I, §104(b), Aug. 17, 1984, 98 Stat. 1335, provided that: "Except as amended by this Act [amending sections 618, 618a, 618e, and 618k of this title], the Boulder Canyon Project Adjustment Act of 1940 (54 Stat. 774, as amended, 43 U.S.C. 618), as amended and supplemented [this subchapter], shall remain in full force and effect."
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 28, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 77740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-28262]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Science Board

AGENCY: Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board Task Force on Identifying and 
Sustaining U.S. Department of Defense/UK Ministry of Defence Defense 
Critical Technologies (Study) will meet in closed session on January 
11, 2005, at Strategic Analysis, Inc., 3601 Wilson Boulevard, 
Arlington, VA. This Task Force will develop a methodology to identify 
unique defense technologies as well as commercially developed 
technologies needing augmentation to fulfill defense niche areas, and 
then apply the methodology to develop a list of defense critical 
technologies.
    The mission of the Defense Science Board is to advise the Secretary 
of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology & Logistics on scientific and technical matters as they 
affect the perceived needs of the Department of Defense. At these 
meetings, the Defense Science Board Task Force should focus its effort 
on high leverage, differentiated and transformational technologies. The 
Study may then use this list of defense critical technologies to 
further assess the tools available to the U.S. DoD or UK MoD to develop 
its critical technology needs. Some of the considerations the Study 
should examine include mechanisms to develop niches in pre-existing 
technologies, foster new technology until the commercial marketplace 
takes over, or develop technology without any expectation of commercial 
development; the analysis should include a review of the applicable 
acquisition/business case. Finally, the Study should consider the 
impact of technology development in other countries and the 
implications that this may have on Anglo-U.S. unique needs.
    In accordance with Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 2), it has been 
determined that these Defense Science Board Task Force meetings concern 
matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and that, accordingly, these 
meetings will be closed to the public.

    Dated: December 20, 2004.
Jeannette Owings-Ballard,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 04-28262 Filed 12-27-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
Editorial Note on Part 3282
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3282 appear at 78 FR 60199, Oct. 1, 2013.

§ 3282.111 Petitions for reconsideration of final rules. ( a ) *Definition.* A petition for reconsideration of a final rule issued by the Secretary is a request in writing from any interested person which must be received not later than 60 days after publication of the rule in the Federal Register. The petition shall state that it is a petition for reconsideration of a final rule, and shall contain an explanation as to why compliance with the rule is not practicable, is unreasonable, or is not in the public interest. If the petitioner requests the consideration of additional facts, the petitioner shall state the reason they were not presented to be treated as petitions for rulemaking.
( b ) *Proceedings on petitions for reconsideration.* The Secretary may grant or deny, in whole or in part, any petition for reconsideration without further proceedings. The Secretary may issue a final decision on reconsideration without further proceeding, or may provide such opportunity to submit comments or information and data as the Secretary deems appropriate.
( c ) Unless the Secretary determines otherwise, the filing of a petition under this section does not stay the effectiveness of the rule in question.
( d ) Any party seeking to challenge any rule or regulation issued under the Act, except orders issued under section 604 42 U.S.C. 5403, if the challenge is brought before the expiration of the 60 day period set out in paragraph (a) of this section, shall file a timely petition for reconsideration under this section prior to seeking any other remedy.
#### Kirby *v.*Thompson.

August 16, 1912.

Action for damages. Before Judge Edwards. Douglas superior court. June 13, 1911.

*J. 8. James,*for plaintiff.

*W. T. Roberts*and *J. R. Hutcheson,*for defendant.

Lumpkin, J.

1. Where an action was brought to recover damages for an assault and battery, and a plea of justification was filed, under the ruling in *Conley*v. Arnold, 93 *Ga.*823, a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for only five dollars was contrary to law, and should have been set aside on a motion for a new trial made by him.

2. Upon the trial of an action to recover damages for an assault and battery, it might not have been proper for the defendant to introduce evidence that he had been tried and convicted in a mayor’s court for the offense against the municipal law, growing out of his conduct in the transaction, and had paid his fine; but where the plaintiff introduced evidence of the conviction and imposition of the fine and the amount thereof, it would not cause a new trial at his instance that the defendant was permitted to testify that he paid the fine so imposed.

3. The other grounds of the motion for a new trial do not require a reversal. *Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices eoneur.*
#### SHIPSEY et al. v. MANHATTAN RY. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 13, 1903.)

Action by Jacob Shipsey and others against the Manhattan Railway Company.

No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3091 

To extend temporarily the duty suspension on 4,4’-Oxydiphthalic Anhydride 

(ODPA). 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 28, 2005 

Mr. HOBSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend temporarily the duty suspension on 4,4’- 

Oxydiphthalic Anhydride (ODPA). 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.05.13 of sub5 chapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Sched6 ule of the United States, relating to 4,4’-Oxydiphthalic 

7 Anhydride (CAS # 1823–59–2) is amended by striking 

8 12/31/2006 and inserting 12/31/2009. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 
2 

HR 3091 IH 

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 7496** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. CHARLES DEVERNIE HARRISON , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the W estern District of North Carolina , at Charlotte
. Martin K. Reidinger , District Judge. ( 3:08

- cr - 00207

- MR

- 1; 3:11

- cv - 00444

- MR )

Submitted : February 23, 2012 Decided: February 28, 2012

Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un pu blished per curiam opinion
. Charles Devernie Harrison, Appellant Pro Se. Kurt William Meyers, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Cha rles Devernie Harrison seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 225 3(c)(1) (B) (2006) . 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) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standa rd by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85.
W e have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Harrison has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,127
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 1,450
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     21,497
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             944
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               940
<LOANS>                                         35,908
<ALLOWANCE>                                        451
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  62,555
<DEPOSITS>                                      54,425
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                377
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,960
<OTHER-SE>                                        (207)
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  62,555
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,241
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,034
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   122
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,397
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,630
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,630
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,767
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      130
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   7
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,252
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    489
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         305
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       305
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .038
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .038
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.99
<LOANS-NON>                                         26
<LOANS-PAST>                                         2
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   360
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       41
<RECOVERIES>                                         2
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  451
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               451
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
#### § 14.300 Jurisdiction of adjudicative officer.

Any provision in the Department's rules and regulations other than this part which limits or terminates the jurisdiction of an adjudicative officer upon the effective date of his or her decision in the underlying proceeding shall not in any way affect his or her jurisdiction to render a decision under this part.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**Certification Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United StatesCode)**

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), I, Michael G. Long, ChiefFinancial Officer of Edge Petroleum Corporation, Inc., a Delaware corporation(the “Company”), hereby certify, to my knowledge, that:

(1)                                  theCompany’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30,2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)                                  theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Dated: | August 9, 2007 | /s/ Michael G.  Long                    |
|--------|----------------|-----------------------------------------|
|   |           | Michael G. Long                         |
|   |           | Chief Financial  and Accounting Officer |
|        |                |                                         |  |

 

----
Exhibit
        32


**CERTIFICATION**









I,
      Nazzareno E. Paciotti, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
      of
      GVI Security Solutions, Inc. (the company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
      to
      my knowledge:




(i)
      The
      Company’s accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the three months
      ended June 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(ii)
      The
      information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.














/s/
      Nazzareno E. Paciotti


Nazzareno
      E. Paciotti


Chief
      Executive Officer


Chief
      Financial Officer









Dated: November
      14,  2005
<PAGE>




                                   EXHIBIT 23

                       CONSENT OF BEARD MILLER COMPANY LLP


<PAGE>



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


The Board of Directors
Lincoln Park Bancorp

        We consent to incorporation by reference in Registration Statement on
Form S-8 of Lincoln Park Bancorp of our report dated January 27, 2006, relating
to the consolidated statements of financial condition of Lincoln Park Bancorp
and Subsidiary as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated
statements of income, comprehensive income, stockholders' equity and cash flows
for the years then ended, which report appears in the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005.


                                                /s/ Beard Miller Company LLP


Beard Miller Company LLP
Pine Brook, New Jersey
March 30, 2006
#### In the Matter of Guido Molino et al., Appellants, v. Theodore H. Lang et al., Constituting the Department of Personnel and the Civil Service Commission of the City of New York, Respondents.

Order entered on or about December 28, 1961 unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondents. No opinion. Concur—Valente, J. P., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

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



David G. Baker, President and Chief Executive Officer and Nandini S. Mallya,
Interim Chief Financial Officer of Lincoln Park Bancorp (the "Company"), each
certify in their capacity as an officer of the Company that they have reviewed
the amended Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended
December 31, 2005 and that to the best of their knowledge:

1.       the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) 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.

The purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.





October 30, 2006                      /s/ David G. Baker
                                      ---------------------------------------
Date                                  David G. Baker
                                      President and Chief Executive Officer

October 30, 2006                      /s/ Nandini S. Mallya
                                      ---------------------------------------
Date                                  Nandini S. Mallya
                                      Interim Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gaetano Flores, Appellant.

Judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, ren*844dered January 9, 1976, affirmed (see *People v Yanik,*43 NY2d 97). Damiani, J. P., Suozzi, Rabin and Shapiro, JJ., concur.
### §478. Pecuniary penalty for nonpayment of installments of construction charges

If any water-right applicant or entryman shall have, prior to December 5, 1924, failed to pay any installment of his construction charges when due, there shall be added to the amount unpaid a penalty of 1 per centum thereof, and there shall be added a like penalty of 1 per centum of the amount unpaid on the first day of each month thereafter so long as such default shall have continued: Provided, That the penalty of 1 per centum per month against delinquent accounts, is reduced to one-half of 1 per centum per month, as to all installments which may become due after December 5, 1924.

(Aug. 13, 1914, ch. 247, §3, 38 Stat. 687; Dec. 5, 1924, ch. 4, §4, subsec. H, 43 Stat. 703.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section consolidates first sentence of act Aug. 13, 1914, §3, with act Dec. 5, 1924, §4, subsec. H.
§ 203.439 Mortgages on Hawaiian home lands insured pursuant to section 247 of the National Housing Act. ( a ) *Exemptions.* The provisions of §§ 203.351(a)(8), 203.353(a), and 203.368, do not apply to mortgages insured pursuant to section 247 of the National Housing Act.
( b ) *Claim procedure.* Where the mortgage is 180 days or more in default, the mortgagee may assign the mortgage to the Secretary and file its claim for insurance benefits in accordance with the provisions of this subpart. No claim on an insured mortgage will be paid other than through assignment of the mortgage.
( c ) *Notice of delinquency.* Once each month on a day prescribed by HUD, the mortgagee shall notify the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands of all mortgages insured pursuant to section 247 of the National Housing Act on leaseholds of Hawaiian home lands that are delinquent on the last day of the month, or that were reported as delinquent the previous month. The notice is in addition to the requirement in §§ 203.330 and 203.331.
[52 FR 8068, Mar. 16, 1987, as amended at 52 FR 9989, Mar. 27, 1987 and 52 FR 28470, July 30, 1987, and amended at 55 FR 283, Jan. 4, 1990; 71 FR 16234, Mar. 31, 2006]
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the annual report
of GlobalOptions Group, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), I, Harvey W. Schiller, Principal Executive 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, to my
knowledge:





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.





March
      13, 2009
            
            /s/
      Harvey W. SchillerName:
            Harvey
      W. SchillerTitle:
            Chairman
      of the Board and
              Chief
      Executive Officer
              (Principal
      Executive Officer)
### SUBCHAPTER III—OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS