alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3440 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3440

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the third day of January, two thousand and six

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  100 Avenida RL Rodriguez in Bayamon, Puerto Rico, as the ``Dr. Jose 
                  Celso Barbosa Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

     The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 100 
Avenida RL Rodriguez in Bayamon, Puerto Rico, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Dr. Jose Celso Barbosa Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Dr. Jose Celso Barbosa Post 
Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
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 Turbodyne Technologies, Inc. ("Company") Quarterly Report
on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended September 30, 2007 ("Report"), the
undersigned certifies 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: November 14, 2007

By: /s/ Debi Kokinos
--------------------
Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
#### Grant Airmass Corp., Respondent, v Solidyne, Inc., Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 5, 1977, as denied its motion to permanently stay arbitration. Order affirmed *979insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements. In view of the binding arbitration agreement entered into by the parties, the issues should be resolved in that forum. Since defendant-appellant’s motion to stay the plaintiff-respondent’s action at law was granted, it cannot foreclose all avenues of relief to plaintiff by attempting to also bar arbitration. Martuscello, J. P., Titone, Suozzi and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
### §§472, 472a. Repealed. Oct. 31, 1951, ch. 654, §1(126), 65 Stat. 706

Section 472, act Mar. 27, 1928, ch. 251, §1, 45 Stat. 371, related to disposition of abandoned military reservations in Alaska, including signal corps stations and rights-of-way.

Section 472a, act Mar. 27, 1928, ch. 251, §2, 45 Stat. 371, related to promulgation of rules and regulations in connection with abandoned military reservations in Alaska.
Exhibit
32.1




18
U.S.C. Section 1350 Certification




In
connection with the Annual Report of NGP Capital Resources Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
John H. Homier, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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, as amended;
  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 16,
2009


/s/ JOHN H. HOMIERJohn
      H. Homier,President
      and Chief Executive Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
NGP Capital Resources Company and will be retained by NGP Capital Resources
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsSimulated-airline-service flight tests of laminar-flow control with perforated-surface suction systemThe effectiveness and practicality of candidate leading edge systems for suction laminar flow control transport airplanes were investigated in a flight test program utilizing a modified JetStar airplane. The leading edge region imposes the most severe conditions on systems required for any type of laminar flow control. Tests of the leading edge systems, therefore, provided definitive results as to the feasibility of active laminar flow control on airplanes. The test airplane was operated under commercial transport operating procedures from various commercial airports and at various seasons of the year.Document ID19900008311Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsMaddalon, Dal V.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA., United States)*Braslow, Albert L.*(Analytical Services and Materials, Inc., Hampton VA., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1990Subject CategoryAircraft Design, Testing And PerformanceReport/Patent NumberNASA-TP-2966L-16589NAS 1.60:2966Accession Number90N17627Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-60-41-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900008311.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
### §358. Master's control over operations

The radio installation, the operators, the regulation of their watches, the transmission and receipt of messages, and the radio service of the ship except as they may be regulated by law or international agreement, or by rules and regulations made in pursuance thereof, shall in the case of a ship of the United States be under the supreme control of the master.

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title III, §360, formerly §358, as added May 20, 1937, ch. 229, §10(b), 50 Stat. 195; renumbered §360, ch. 729, §2(a)(1), Aug. 13, 1954, 68 Stat. 706.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective May 20, 1937, see section 16 of act May 20, 1937, set out as a note under section 351 of this title.
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 235 (Monday, December 7, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78889-78890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26892]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 9, 2020. PLACE: The 
meeting will be held via remote means and/or at the Commission's 
headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, 
the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend 
the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the 
matters also may be present.
    In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting 
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, 
and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website 
at https://www.sec.gov.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), 
permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
    The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the 
following topic:
    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;

[[Page 78890]]

    Resolution of litigation claims; and
    Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings; and
    Disclosure of non-public information.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of 
adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information; please 
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 
551-5400.

     Dated: December 2, 2020.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-26892 Filed 12-3-20; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
Exhibit 32.02

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 of ReachLocal, Inc. (the Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ross G. Landsbaum, Chief 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 the best of 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.



/s/ Ross G. LandsbaumRoss G. LandsbaumChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)Date: March 28, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM LIBERTY
SATELLITE & TECHNOLOGY INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                            208,273
<SECURITIES>                                      339,671
<RECEIVABLES>                                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        0
<PP&E>                                                350
<DEPRECIATION>                                         92
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  1,047,085
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   0
<BONDS>                                            58,147
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             195,171
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                           72,498
<OTHER-SE>                                         65,307
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    1,047,085
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      340
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  3,695
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (49,109)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        6,456
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (42,653)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (42,653)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (.86)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.86)



</TABLE>
### §§631 to 633. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Sections 631 to 633, relating to Territory of Hawaii, were omitted in view of admission of Hawaii into the Union.

Section 631, act Apr. 30, 1900, ch. 339, §81, 31 Stat. 157, made provision for vesting of judicial power in courts and continued in force the courts' jurisdiction and procedure previously in force.

Section 632, acts Apr. 30, 1900, ch. 339, §82, 31 Stat. 157; June 15, 1950, ch. 250, 64 Stat. 216, set out size and organization of supreme court, appointment and qualifications of its members, and provisions for filling of vacancies therein.

Section 633, acts Apr. 30, 1900, ch. 339, §80, 31 Stat. 156; Mar. 3, 1905, ch. 1465, §2, 33 Stat. 1035; July 9, 1921, ch. 42, §312, 42 Stat. 119; May 9, 1956, ch. 237, §1, 70 Stat. 130, called for presidential appointment of members of supreme court and circuit courts and set tenure and qualifications of judges.
#### Israel Trachtenberg, Appellant, v. John P. Rowan, as Executor of Ben Lupoff, Deceased, Respondent

Motion for reargument and for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals referred to the court that rendered the decision. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur. Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.
#### EWING v. BARNARD.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

June 22, 1903.)

1. Landlord and Tenant—Actions for Rent—Surrender—Acceptance— Questions for Jury.

Where, in a suit for rent, the defense is a surrender and acceptance, and defendant testifies to a conversation with plaintiff in which he stated to plaintiff that he intended to pay no more rent, to which plaintiff replied that he had better give possession, and directed him to deliver the key to the janitor, which he did, the question of 'the surrender and acceptance is for the jury.

Appeal from. City Court of New York.

Action by Justus E. Ewing against Arthur W. Barnard. From a judgment for plaintiff, and an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appeals. Reversed.

Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and GILDERSLEEVE and MacLEAN, JJ.

L. J. Morrison, for appellant.

Theron G. Strong, for respondent.

GILDERSLEEVE, J.

The action is for rent for August, September, and October, 1902. The defense is a surrender and acceptance, and a counterclaim for breach of a collateral agreement. The jury found for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

The court charged the jury as follows, viz.:

> “As to the claim that the premises were surrendered, I charge you, as a matter of law, under the proof presented, that the premises were not surrendered by Mr. Barnard [defendant] to Mr. Ewing [plaintiff], as he has claimed.”

At the close of the charge, the defendant’s counsel said:

> “I except to your honor’s charge as to the surrender: ‘As a matter of law, the premises were not surrendered.’ ”

It appears from the testimony of defendant as follows:

> “I had a conversation with him [plaintiff] in August about giving up the premises—about the 10th or 11th. He asked me for the August rent. I told him, under the circumstances, I did not intend to pay any more rent, as he had not fulfilled his contract. He said, ‘You better give me possession of the premises,’ and I said I would as soon as I could make it convenient to get out. * * * I made my arrangements as fast as I could, and I did get out in the'month of August. Mr. Ewing [plaintiff] gave me instructions to surrender the key to the janitor. I did surrender the key to the janitor on the 29th or 30th of August.”

Under this evidence, the court should have left the question of surrender and acceptance to the jury.

The judgment is reversed, and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1206

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1206 (formerly part 206) appear at 67 FR 19111, Apr. 18, 2002.

#### § 1206.147 When is an ONRR audit, review, reconciliation, monitoring, or other like process considered final?

Notwithstanding any provision in these regulations to the contrary, ONRR does not consider any audit, review, reconciliation, monitoring, or other like process that results in ONRR re-determining royalty due, under this subpart, final or binding as against the Federal government or its beneficiaries unless ONRR chooses to, in writing, formally close the audit period.
### Part B—Merchant Marine Service
121 STAT. 1020 PUBLIC LAW 110–104—OCT. 24, 2007 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3052: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007): 

Sept. 5, considered and passed House. 

Oct. 3, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 110–104 

110th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 954 Wheeling 

Avenue in Cambridge, Ohio, as the ‘‘John Herschel Glenn, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. JOHN HERSCHEL GLENN, JR. POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 954 Wheeling Avenue in Cambridge, Ohio, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘John Herschel Glenn, Jr. Post 

Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference 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 ‘‘John Herschel Glenn, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

Approved October 24, 2007. 

Oct. 24, 2007 

[H.R. 3052]
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: 2015-NM-063-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Replacement 12.0 $1,020.0

0

$13,468 $14,488.00 126 $1,825,488.0

0

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $1,825,488

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3473 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3473

  To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to apply to 
                Federal and State government employers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 27, 2005

 Mr. English of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
   referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in 
  addition to the Committee on Government Reform, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to apply to 
                Federal and State government employers.

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

SECTION 1. FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYERS.

    Section 3(5) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 is 
amended by striking ``but does not include'' and all that follows 
through ``State'' and inserting ``including the United States 
government, any government of a State or political subdivision of a 
State, or any interstate governmental agency.''
                                 <all>
```