alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       2,569,300
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,634,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,180,100
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,518,400
<PP&E>                                       8,685,300
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,474,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,774,200
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,208,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  5,400,000
<COMMON>                                     8,292,900
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,002,500
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,774,200
<SALES>                                     10,277,200
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,277,200
<CGS>                                        7,822,600
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,822,600
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,695,400
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             101,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,845,200
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,845,200
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,845,200
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13
        

</TABLE>
#### BRIGGS, Appellant, v. DEVOE, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

December 1, 1903.)

Action by Henry F. Briggs against Daniel I. Devoe, as executor, etc.

No opinion. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 14 (Monday, January 25, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6894-6895]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-01444]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Nursing Research; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Nursing Research 
Initial Review Group.
    Date: February 18-19, 2021.
    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute of Nursing Research, National 
Institutes of Health, 6701

[[Page 6895]]

Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Cheryl Nordstrom, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes 
of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Suite 703H, Bethesda, MD 20892, 
(301) 827-1499, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#80e3e8e5f2f9ecaeeeeff2e4f3f4f2efedc0eee9e8aee7eff6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e98a818c9b9085c787869b8d9a9d9b8684a9878081c78e869f">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.361, 
Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: January 15, 2021.
Tyeshia Roberson,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-01444 Filed 1-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

'JUL 24 2015 

MEMORANDUM 

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

SUBJECT: BEAD Chemical Profile for Registration Review: Strychnine Alkaloid (076901) 

FROM: Colwell Cook, EntomologistlA~ Biological Analysis Branch 

Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) 

THRU: Arnet Jones, Chief ~ ~ r /:rrri.t.V~ 

Biological Analysis Branch 

Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) 

TO: Joel Wolf, Chemical Review Manager 

Risk Management and Implementation Branch II 

Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P) 

Product Review Panel date: July 22, 2015 

SUMMARY 

The Biological and Economic Analysis Division (BEAD) Chemical Profile (BCP) provides an 

overview of the pest management role for strychnine. lnfonnation provided in this BCP may be 

used by stakeholders (e.g. users and registrants), OPP risk and benefit assessors, OPP risk 

managers, and the general public during the Registration Review process of this pesticide. 

Strychnine is a rodenticide, first registered in the U.S. in 1947. It is currently registered only for 

underground use to control pocket gophers. It is available as a grain-based bait or a paste. 

Application methods may be by hand, or with the use of burrow-builder (which digs artificial 

tunnels), or an injector which pushes the bait into the animals' tunnels. Use sites include 

orchards, pastures, rangelands, agricultural crops, non-agricultural uncultivated areas, irrigation 

systems, residential outdoor premises. 
A terpene indole alkaloid, strychnine is a neurotoxin which acts as an antagonist of the glycine 

and acetylcholine receptors. This action results in muscles that continuously contract. 

BEAD has not conducted any benefits assessments nor Section 18 Emergency Exemption 

requests for strychnine in the last decade. While an emergency exemption request may yield 

some information about a chemical's importance, the lack of such requests do not indicate the 

relative importance of this chemical. 

BEAD has no available usage information for strychnine. Information on why strychnine is 

selected over other rodenticides would be helpful. In addition, descriptions of where, when, and 

how strychnine is used would also be useful. 

/ 

2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.2.1

Eastern Division

Mary T. Janetos, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−01473

Honorable Thomas M. Durkin

Fulton Friedman & Gullace, LLP, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Tuesday, May 15, 2018:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin:Motion to withdraw as

attorney [237] is granted; Attorney Robert M. Horwitz terminated.Mailed notice(srn, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-01473 Document #: 238 Filed: 05/15/18 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:2315
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**

**(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**

In connection with the Annual Report of BancTec, Inc, a Delawarecorporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K/A for the year ending December 31,2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, JeffreyD. Cushman, Senior Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 
| / s /   Jeffrey D.  Cushman         |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                               |
| Jeffrey D. Cushman                                 |
| Senior Vice President and  Chief Financial Officer |
|                                               |
| June 26, 2007                                      |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by 18 USC Section1350 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
**U.S. Department of Education**

**Violence Against Women Act Negotiated Rulemaking Committee**

**Meeting Summary**

**January 13-14, 2014**

**Welcome**

Dr. Brenda Dann-Messier, Acting Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education, welcomed the members of the Committee and thanked them for agreeing to assist the Department in developing regulations to implement provisions of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). 

**Introductions**

All members who were present introduced themselves. 

**Overview of the Negotiated Rulemaking Process**

The facilitators provided an overview of the negotiated rulemaking process. They explained that the Committee’s discussions will focus on developing consensus regulatory text for the Department’s proposed rule to implement VAWA. 

**Review and Adopt Protocols**

Committee members discussed and adopted the draft organizational protocols, which will govern the Committee’s activities throughout the negotiated rulemaking process. 

# Membership

The membership of the Committee was discussed.  Additions to the Committee membership were proposed and discussed, and several were agreed to. The following members were accepted:

**Federal Negotiator**

**Non-Federal Negotiators**

**Agenda and Review of Issues**

A representative of the Department’s Office of Civil Rights offered an overview of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The Committee reviewed and approved the draft Agenda, and discussed in detail the substantive topics listed on the Agenda. 

# Public Comment

# Opportunities were provided each day for the members of the public to provide comments.  Several comments from the public were received at the end of each day.

# Next Meeting

# The next Committee session will be held on February 24 and 25, 2014 at the U.S. Department of Education in the 8th Floor Conference Center located at 1990 K St. NW in Washington, D.C. Sessions will begin at 9:00 a.m. and conclude at 5:00 p.m. each day.

**Next Steps**

The Committee established two subgroups to meet by telephone prior to the next Committee meeting. These were the Stalking Subcommittee headed by Laura Dunn and the Prevention/Training Subcommittee headed by Nancy Chi Cantalupo. Each group was to seek to develop advice and possible draft regulatory text for the full Committee and the Department to consider.

**Members Present**

Non-federal Members:

Stephanie Atella 

Rick Amweg

Connie Best

Jerry Blakemore

Nancy Chi Cantalupo

S. Daniel Carter

Paul Denton

Jill Dunlap

Laura Dunn

Deana Echols 

Lisa Erwin

Caroline Fultz- Carver

Christine Gordon

Fatima Goss Graves

Dennis Gregory 

Bridgette Harwood

Michael Heidingsfield 

John Kelly

Alison Kiss

Jessica Ladd-Webert

Gary Lyle

Julie Poorman

Holly Rider-Milkovich 

Cat Riley

Dana Scaduto

Anthony Walker

U.S. Department of Education:

Gail McLarnon
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

SHARON ALICIA BURKE ANZALDI, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12 C 2987

)

RACHEL MARIE CANNON, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

1

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Unsuccessful in her effort to wreak vengeance against judicial officers and the prosecutor

who are involved in the federal criminal case against her -- an effort that is clearly in retaliation

for their performance of their assigned roles in her prosecution on those criminal charges --

Sharon Alicia Burke Anzaldi ("Anzaldi") has now turned (perhaps predictably) to launching

ad hominem attacks against this Court for doing its job in addressing her groundless Complaint

filed against those federal targets. Because Anzaldi's September 7 filing has permitted more than

Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 59(e)'s nonextendable 28 day time limit to elapse following this Court's

August 7, 2012 dismissal of her action, that Rule is unavailable to her -- and she has shown no

basis for relief under Rule 60(b).

This Court will not retaliate in kind against the base canards contained in Anzaldi's

current "Motion To Void Judgment/Memorandum For Violations of Civil Rights, Due Process of

Law and Malicious Conduct Unbecoming a Federal Judge," even by cataloging the outright

 This is the correct case caption, although the current motion lists the "United States of 1

America" as defendant. That may be a Freudian slip, because the underlying Complaint and

many of plaintiff's filings read as though she is indeed at war with the United States.
falsehoods included in her statement. Instead, because the bulk of Anzaldi's current filing 2

reconfirms the bizarre world in which she seems to function, and because this Court's dismissal

order was entirely appropriate, her current motion is denied.

__________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: September 12, 2012

 Objective evidence, such as the transcripts of in-court proceedings, would put the lie 2

to the various distorted versions offered up by Anzaldi. And as another example of revisionist

history, it is flat-out false for Anzaldi to say in Motion ¶ 4 that this Court "stack[ed] the court

room with 7-8 enforcement personnel" -- where she got that idea is a total mystery.

- 2 -
EXHIBIT
32.2
  Statmon
Technologies Corp.
  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 19 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 Statmon Technologies Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K/A for the year ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Geoffrey P. Talbot, 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 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/ Geoffrey P.
Talbot
 Geoffrey
P. Talbot
 Chief
Financial Officer
 April 8,
2009
  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 Statmon Technologies Corp. and will be
retained by Statmon Technologies Corp. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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.                  

###### International Trade Commission

          - [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-636 and 731-TA-1470 (Final)]

# AGENCY:

United States International Trade Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# DATES:

January 13, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Keysha Martinez (202-205-2136), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (                        *https://www.usitc.gov*). The public record for these investigations may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at                         *https://edis.usitc.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On August 12, 2020, the Commission established a schedule for the conduct of the final phase of the subject investigations (85 FR 54593, September 2, 2020). In light of the federal holiday on January 20, 2021, the Commission is revising the final comments deadline to no later than 10 a.m., January 21, 2021.

For further information concerning this proceeding, see the Commission's notice cited above and the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207).

Authority:These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.21 of the Commission's rules.

By order of the Commission.

Issued: January 19, 2021.

William Bishop,

Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 2021-01532 Filed 1-22-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7293

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

SILAS JUNIOR MOBLEY, 

Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, 

Jr., District Judge. (3:09-cr-00189-RJC-DCK-2; 3:13-cv-00458-

RJC) 

Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 10, 2017

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Silas Junior Mobley, Appellant Pro Se. Steven R. Kaufman, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Amy 

Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, 

North Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2

PER CURIAM: 

Silas Junior Mobley seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. 

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge 

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard 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. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Mobley 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 legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. RONALD LEE SUBER, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 85 WAL 2015 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 27th day of May, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.