alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
13.105 Synopsis and posting requirements. ( a ) The contracting officer must comply with the public display and synopsis requirements of 5.101 and 5.203 unless an exception in 5.202 applies.
( b ) When acquiring commercial products or commercial services,or supplies or services produced in accordance with 12.102(f)(1), the contracting officer may use a combined synopsis and solicitation. In these cases, a separate solicitation is not required. The contracting officer must include enough information to permit suppliers to develop quotations or offers.
( c ) See 5.102(a)(6) for the requirement to post a brand name justification or documentation required by 13.106-1(b) or 13.501.
( d ) When publicizing contract actions funded in whole or in part by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-5): ( 1 ) Notices of proposed contract actions shall follow the procedures in 5.704 for posting orders.
( 2 ) Award notices shall follow the procedures in 5.705.
[62 FR 64917, Dec. 9, 1997, as amended at 63 FR 58593, Oct. 30, 1998; 66 FR 27413, May 16, 2001; 68 FR 4050, Jan. 27, 2003; 69 FR 8314, Feb. 23, 2004; 71 FR 57360, Sept. 28, 2006; 72 FR 63076, Nov. 7, 2007; 74 FR 14639, Mar. 31, 2009; 86 FR 61025, Nov. 4, 2021]
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Siegfried Balsam, Respondent, v. Tip Top Shoe et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Motion for an order directing the Workmen’s Compensation Board to accept a notice of appeal. Motion denied, without costs.
#### UNITED STATES of America v. Richard LUNA.

No. EP-70-CR-92.

United States District Court, W. D. Texas, El Paso Division.

May 7, 1970.

*1295Seagal Y. Wheatley, U. S. Atty., Andrew Gary, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., for Government.

Gerald B. Shifrin, El Paso, Tex., for defendant.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS

SUTTLE, District Judge.

On the 6th day of May, 1970, came on for consideration and hearing the Defendant’s Motion to Suppress, and the Court, having considered the Motion, Brief in support thereof, government’s response thereto, and the evidence adduced at the hearing, finds and rules as follows :

Defendant seeks to suppress statements he made to Special Agent James R. Burns and Internal Revenue Agent Fred Hiebert, specifically during an interview October 31, 1967, from 1:00 to 3:45 p. m., and a phone call October 25, 1967, in which the interview was arranged. These statements are summarized in the Agents’ memoranda thereof admitted into evidence as Exhibit Nos. 4 and 5. Defendant claims that he was not advised of and did not waive his rights before being questioned as required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). The Court finds that none of the statements complained of were gained through “custodial interrogation,” and that *Miranda*does not apply. See United States v. Prudden, 424 F.2d 1021 (5th Cir., 1970), and cases cited therein. Defendant next contends that IRS News Release No. 897, issued October 3, 1967, required such warnings and waiver regardless of whether *Miranda*did, citing United States v. Heffner, 420 F.2d 809 (4th Cir. 1969). This Court declines to follow *Heffner.*The cases cited in the majority’s opinion in *Heffner*dealt with reversals of final agency action because the administrative procedure adopted by the agency was not followed. None dealt with the exclusion of evidence in a federal criminal trial, and hence none, including *Heffner,*weighed the possible value of consistent agency procedures with the need for evidence relevant to the truth sought in a federal criminal trial. While the need to enforce rights granted by the Constitution and laws of the United States may outweigh the interests mitigating against the exclusion of otherwise admissible evidence, the enforcement of an agency policy statement does not, regardless of how desirable that policy might be. The Constitution and laws may of necessity dictate preconditions for the admissibility of evidence in a federal trial; administrative agencies may not.

The Motion to Suppress must therefore be, and the same is hereby, in all things, denied, and it is so ordered.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

Certification Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 

as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

In connection with thequarterly report of Educational Development Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending November 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned certifypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  | January 14, 2010 |   | By     | /s/ Randall W. White                          |
|--------|-----------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|   |                  |   |   | Randall W. White                              |
|   |                  |   |   | President and Chief  Executive Officer        |
|   |                  |   |   |                                          |
|   |                  |   |   |                                          |
| Date:  | January 14, 2010 |   | By     | /s/ Marilyn R. Pinney                         |
|   |                  |   |   | Controller and  Corporate Secretary           |
|   |                  |   |   | (Principal Financial  and Accounting Officer) |

 

----
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATIONS
of the Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 I, Richard H. Lewis, Chief Executive Officer of Prima Energy Corporation (the
Company), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  (1)
    
    The Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date herein (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/ Richard H. Lewis
Richard H. LewisChief Executive OfficerMarch 12, 2004
 I, Neil L. Stenbuck, Chief Financial Officer of Prima Energy Corporation (the
Company), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  (1)
    
    The Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date herein (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/ Neil L. Stenbuck
Neil L. StenbuckChief Financial OfficerMarch 12, 2004
EXHIBIT
4.54(B)


 


AMENDMENT
TO SECURITY AGREEMENT


 


This Security
Pledge Amendment, dated as of February 28, 2006, is delivered pursuant to Section
5.1 of that certain security agreement (as amended, amended and restated,
supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the “Security
Agreement”; capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall
have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Security Agreement), dated as
of February 8, 2002, among Jacobs Entertainment, Inc. (formerly known as
Gameco, Inc.) (the “Issuer”), the undersigned, the other Guarantors from time
to time party thereto and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee
(in such capacity and together with any successors in such capacity, the “Trustee”).  The undersigned hereby agrees that this
Pledge Amendment may be attached to the Security Agreement and that the Pledged
Securities and/or Intercompany Notes listed on this Pledge Amendment shall be
deemed to be and shall become part of the Pledged Collateral and shall secure
all Secured Obligations.


 


PLEDGED
SECURITIES


 


	
  ISSUER

  	
   

  	
  CLASS

  OF STOCK

  OR

  INTERESTS

  	
   

  	
  CERTIFICATE

  NO(S).

  	
   

  	
  PERCENTAGE OF ALL ISSUED CAPITAL OR OTHER EQUITY INTERESTS OF ISSUER

  	
   

  
	
  Jalou of
  Larose, LLC

  	
   

  	
  Membership

  Interests

  	
   

  	
  1

  	
   

  	
  100

  	
  %

  
	
  Fuel Stop
  36, Inc.

  	
   

  	
  Common Stock

  	
   

  	
  5

  	
   

  	
  100

  	
  %

  



 


INTERCOMPANY
NOTES


 


	
  ISSUER

  	
   

  	
  PRINCIPAL

  AMOUNT

  	
   

  	
  DATE OF

  ISSUANCE

  	
   

  	
  INTEREST

  RATE

  	
   

  	
  MATURITY

  DATE

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  None

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  



 


 


[Signature
Page Follows]


 

















 


	
   

  	
  JACOBS
  ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a 

  Delaware corporation, as Pledgor

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
       /s/
  Jeffrey P. Jacobs

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Jeffrey P.
  Jacobs

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  President

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  JALOU L.L.C.,
  a Louisiana limited liability

  company, as Pledgor

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
       /s/
  Stephen R. Roark

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Stephen R.
  Roark

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  President
  and Manager

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  JALOU II
  INC., a Louisiana corporation, as

  Pledgor

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
       /s/
  Stephen R. Roark

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Stephen R.
  Roark,

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  President

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  AGREED TO
  AND ACCEPTED:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  WELLS FARGO
  BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee

  
	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name: 
  Joseph P. O’Donnell

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:   Vice
  President

  	
   

  
										



 


2
Exhibit 32



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 Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending January 2, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report) we, J. Frank Harrison, III, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and David V. Singer, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted pursuant to § 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 represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    J. FRANK HARRISON,
III                                 
|J. Frank Harrison, III                                        
|Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer
|                                                              
|March 15, 2005                                                
|                                                              
|/s/    DAVID V. SINGER                                        
|David V. Singer                                               
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer          
|                                                              
|March 15, 2005
1309.405-1 Continuation of current contracts. ( a ) The designee authorized to direct the discontinuance of a contract or subcontract because of a debarment, suspension or proposed debarment is set forth in CAM 1301.70.
( b ) A written determination must be issued by the designee authorized in CAM 1301.70 before the following actions can be taken with a contractor that is debarred, suspended or proposed for debarment: ( 1 ) Place any orders exceeding the maximum on an indefinite delivery contract;
( 2 ) Place orders under Federal supply schedule contracts, blanket purchase orders or basic ordering agreements; or
( 3 ) Add new work or exercise options that extend the duration of a current contract or order.
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

# TIME AND DATE: 

2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, January 6, 2021.

# 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 topics:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;

Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;

Resolution of litigation claims; and

Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

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 30, 2020.

Jill M. Peterson, 

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2020-29201 Filed 12-30-20; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### § 725.1 Purpose.

This instruction implements 32 CFR part 97 regarding the release of official Department of the Navy (DON) information and provision of testimony by DON personnel for litigation purposes, and prescribes conduct of DON personnel in response to a litigation request or demand. It restates the information contained in Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5820.8A of 27 August 1991[1] , and is intended to conform in all respects with the requirements of that instruction.

###### Footnotes -
  725.1

[1] Copies may be obtained, if needed, from the Naval Publications and Forms Directorate, Attn: Code 301, 5801 Tabor Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19120-5099.
ACCOUNTANT'S CONSENT  
 
We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement 
(No. 33-33180) on Form S-8 of Canisco Resources, Inc. of our reports 
dated May 23, 1997, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Canisco 
Resources, Inc. and subsidiaries as March 31, 1997 and 1996 and the 
related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and 
cash flows and related schedule for the years ended March 31, 1997, the 
six months ended March 31, 1996, and the years ended September 30, 
1995 and 1994, which reports appear in the March 31, 1997 annual report 
on Form 10-K of Canisco Resources, Inc. 
 
Atlanta, Georgia 
June 25, 1997 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Exhibit 23
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Miriam Berkowitz, Respondent, v New York State Labor Relations Board et al., Appellants. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

— Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed April 6, 1978, which held that claimant’s accident occurred within the environs of employment. The board found that: "Claimant, employed as clerk for the New York State Labor Relations Board, whose offices are located in the World Trade Center, while taking some letters from the office to drop into the mail box slipped and fell in the *774Concourse of the World Trade Center on 5/4/77.” The board further found that: "the accident occurred within the environs of employment, therefore *[sic],*the accident arose out of and in the course of employment.” These findings are supported by substantial evidence and the decision of the board must, therefore, be affirmed. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board against the employer and its insurance carrier. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
### §343d. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act June 29, 1935, ch. 338, title II, §22, 49 Stat. 439, as amended, which related to additional appropriations for agricultural colleges, was transferred to section 329 of this title.
OPEPD Organizational Chart 

Immediate Office of the 

Assistant Secretary 

Executive Office Offi ce of Budget Servi ce 

Budget Policy and 

Coordi nation Division 

Budget Execution and 

Admi nistrative Analysis 

Divi sion 

Cos t Es timation and 

Analysis Division 

El ementary, Secondary 

a nd Vocational Analysis 

Divi sion 

Special Education, 

Reha bilitation Research 

and Postsecondary 

Ana l ysis Division 

Grants Policy Office Office of the Chief Data 

Officer 

Governance and 

Strategy Division 

Analytics and 

Infrastructure Division 

Innovation and 

Enga gement Division 

Student Privacy Policy 

Office 

Office of Educational 

Technology
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Quarterly  Report of Emerson Radio Corp. (the "Company")
on Form  10-Q  for the  quarter  ended  December  31,  2002 as  filed  with  the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),  I, Geoffrey P. Jurick, 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:

(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 consolidated financial condition and result of operations of
     the Company.


Dated: February 10, 2003


                             /s/ Geoffrey P. Jurick
                                 Geoffrey P. Jurick
                                 Chief Executive Officer
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133460 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

ANTHONY P. FORNARI,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 133460 

 COA: 265813 

Genesee CC: 04-078667-NI 

GREGORY LEE HOOVER, and 

MIDWEST FIBERGLASS POOL 

DISTRIBUTORS,

 Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 8, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

l1022 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 29, 2007 

 Clerk
#### MOORE, Respondent, v. MONUMENTAL MUT. LIFE INS. CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

January 23, 1903.)

Action by John D. Moore against the Monumental Mutual Life Insurance Company. J. W. Welsh, for appellant. W. Blaikie, for respondent.

No opinion. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with $10 costs, on the authority of Moore v. Monumental Ins. Co. (decided Dec. 5, 1902) 78 N. Y. Supp. 1009.
### **CHAPTER 9—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS**
#### WILSON, Appellant, v. DEXTER SULPHITE PULP & PAPER CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

October 27, 1903.)

Action by John Wilson against the Dexter Sulphite Pulp & Paper Company.

No opinion. Motion for re-argument denied. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted. The form of the order to be settled before WILLIAMS, J., on two days’ notice.
### §6996. Right of participants to Division hearing

#### (a) Appeal to Division for hearing

Subject to subsection (b), a participant shall have the right to appeal an adverse decision to the Division for an evidentiary hearing by a hearing officer consistent with section 6997 of this title.

#### (b) Time for appeal

To be entitled to a hearing under section 6997 of this title, a participant shall request the hearing not later than 30 days after the date on which the participant first received notice of the adverse decision.

(Pub. L. 103–354, title II, §276, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3230.)
#### Nicholas A. Karger v. Pierre F. Nesi et al.

Motion by defen dam-appellant, Pierre F. Nesi, for leave to reargue or for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, with $10 costs. Motion by defendant-appellant, Sid Farber, for leave to reargue or for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, with $10 costs. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Stevens and Bastow, JJ.
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-05-00185- CR NO. 03-05-00186- CR Da vid R. M ar ti ne z , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 403RD JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 20426 54 & 30414 44, H ONO RAB LE BRENDA KENNEDY , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

ME MO R

A ND UMO P I N I O N David Mar

tinez s ee ks to appea l from judg ments of conviction for burg lary of a ha bit atio n. Th e tr ia l c ourt

ha s c e rt if

ie d th at Mar ti ne z wa ive d h is right o f a pp e a l. T he a

pp e a l is dismiss ed. See Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(d).

__________________________________________ W. Kenneth L aw, Chief Justice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Patter son and Puryear Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: May

16, 2005 Do No t Pu

bli sh