alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter B of Chapter XIV

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations to regulations affecting previous program years not included in this volume, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*

#### § 1465.1 Purposes and applicability.

Through the Agricultural Management Assistance program (AMA), the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) provides financial assistance funds annually to producers in 16 statutorily designated States to: Construct or improve water management structures or irrigation structures; plant trees to form windbreaks or to improve water quality; and mitigate risk through production diversification or resource conservation practices including soil erosion control, integrated pest management, or the transition to organic farming. AMA is applicable in Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
EXHIBIT
32.2








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 Datawatch Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Murray P. Fish, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and





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










/s/ Murray P. Fish
              Murray
      P. Fish
              Chief
      Financial Officer
              December
      24, 2008
#### § 1150.117 Plans and projects.

*Plans and projects* means promotion, research and nutrition education plans, studies or projects pursuant to §§ 1150.139, 1150.140 and 1150.161.
Exhibit (32.1)





HARLEYSVILLE GROUP INC.



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 Harleysville Group Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael L. Browne, 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 based on 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.







|Date:   March 12, 2004 |  | /s/ MICHAEL L. BROWNE                 
|---------------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|                       |  | Michael L. Browne                     
|                       |  | Chief Executive Officer and a Director
#### § 1735.52 Findings required for particular loan purposes.

Whenever a borrower proposes to use loan funds for the improvement, expansion, construction, or acquisition of telephone facilities within or for nonrural areas, the borrower shall provide RUS with satisfactory evidence to enable the Administrator to determine that such funds shall be necessary and incidental to furnishing or improving telephone service in rural areas.

[54 FR 13351, Apr. 3, 1989. Redesignated at 55 FR 39395, Sept. 27, 1990, as amended at 86 FR 50609, Sept. 10, 2021]
#### § 160.34 Responsibility of interested person.

The sampling or acceptance of any sample of naval stores by an official inspector for use in grading and certifying the same at the request of an interested person, or the placing of any incorrect classification or grade marks upon the container thereof, or the issue of any incorrect certificate inadvertently to cover the contents, because of inability of the inspector to observe the true condition of the naval stores, shall not prevent the correction or recall of any such certificate, nor relieve the interested person from responsibility for the condition of the article or its container.
#### §§ 1700.5-1700.24 [Reserved]
Date: February 23, 2012

California Environmental Protection Agency

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Enclosure A

Rules That Were Amended by the Following

Air Pollution Control and Air Quality Management Districts

and Are Submitted As Revisions to the

State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving

and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

District

Rule

Number

Date Adopted 

or 

Amended

Title

Antelope Valley 

AQMD 

1168 9/20/11 Adhesive and Sealant 

Applications (amended)

Imperial County 

APCD

903 12/20/11 Potential To Emit (amended)

Imperial County 

APCD

904 12/20/11 Prevention Of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) Program 

(amended)

Sacramento 

Metropolitan

AQMD

101 10/27/11 General Provisions and 

Definitions (amended)

Sacramento 

Metropolitan 

AQMD

459 8/25/11 Automotive, Mobile 

Equipment and Associated 

Parts and Components 

Coating Operations 

(amended)

San Diego County 

APCD

11 11/9/11 Exemption from Rule 10 

Permit Requirements 

(amended)
California Environmental Protection Agency

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Enclosure A (continued)

Rules That Were Amended by the Following

Air Pollution Control and Air Quality Management Districts

and Are Submitted As Revisions to the

State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving

and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

District

Rule

Number

Date Adopted 

or Amended Title

2

San Diego County 

APCD

67.4 11/9/11 Metal Container, Metal 

Closure, and Metal Coil 

Coating Operations 

(amended)

San Diego County 

APCD

67.16 11/9/11 Graphic Arts Operations 

(amended) 

San Joaquin Valley 

APCD

4352 12/15/11 Solid Fuel Fired Boilers, 

Steam Generators and 

Process Heaters (amended)

San Joaquin Valley 

APCD

4402 12/15/11 Crude Oil Production Sumps

(amended)

San Joaquin Valley 

APCD

4625 12/15/11 Wastewater Separators

(amended)

San Joaquin Valley 

APCD

4682 12/15/11 Polystyrene, Polyethylene, 

and Polypropylene Products 

Manufacturing (amended)
California Environmental Protection Agency

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Enclosure A (continued)

Rules That Were Amended by the Following

Air Pollution Control and Air Quality Management Districts

and Are Submitted As Revisions to the

State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving

and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

District

Rule

Number

Date Adopted 

or Amended Title

3

Santa Barbara 

County APCD

352 10/20/11 Natural Gas-Fired Fan-Type 

Central Furnaces and Small 

Water Heaters (amended)

South Coast AQMD 463 11/4/11 Organic Liquid Storage 

(amended)
14910-13-PI DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA nON o~n'''''f~C'.& m~GSn,OOL Federal AviatioD Administration 14 CFR Part 39 ,



# "--" \.Y IDocket No. FAA-2009-i-)**~; Directorate 

### Ide_"ti,fier 2009-NM-133-AD; ---''-.J. ~.r L-' 

## _,"""J .-' ..... i£" '.-!--__ \... i/- -L"---' Amendment 39-*****; AD 2669_h

_fi

### l RlN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A340-200 and A340-300 Senes Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department ofTransportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request forcomments. ~m·\Lli",<i 

# 'tf4'~ 

# 'i/@5/OY
,I"r- 

### <'.0.

above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness infomlation (MeAl) SUMMARY: We arc adopting anew airwonhiness directive (AD) forthe products list d 

## C.~ Mn I 

### vl.'16"( originated by an aviation authority ofanother country to idenlify and correct an unsafe conditioll on an aviation product. The MeAl describes the unsafe condition as: N·lIl1e - 

### 11'-\ 

# '''''~';''1J', I ). I •... ~.'H 

# (Llt',I,

the MeAl. This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in 

## ** 0;< Engineering analysis using the llew calculated loads has shown that the structural integrity of the forward engine mount canllot be guaranteed after either thrust link has accumulated 15 500 Flight Cycles (Fe). 

### * 

## * * f..N.M - (01

* 

## * * *

00"".· .sntllOL DATES: This AD becomes effective [insert date 15days after date ofpublication in th FEDERAL REGJSTER]. The Director ofthe Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of
#### G. B. KENT & SONS, Ltd., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. P. LORILLARD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 200, Docket 22922.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued March 2, 1954.

Decided March 24, 1954.

Lewis & Mound, New York City, Milton N. Mound, Richard Wincor, and Herbert F. Sehmelzer, New York City, of counsel, for plaintiff-appellant.

Campbell, Brumbaugh, Free & Graves, New York City, Walter H. Free, Thomas L. Perkins, Robert McCormack and James N. Buckner, New York City, of counsel, for defendant-appellee.

Before CHASE, Chief Judge, and FRANK and HINCKS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment affirmed on the opinion below. G. B. Kent & Sons v. P. Lorillard Co., D.C., 114 F.Supp. 621.
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

No. 22-30132

Anthony J. Stewart; Diane Raley; Tomika Jordan; Sheena Altine; Tyelga J. Kearney; Et al,

Plaintiffs—Appellees ,

versus
Entergy Corporation; Entergy New Orleans, L.L.C.; Entergy Louisiana, L.L.C.,

Defendants—Appellants

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:21-CV-1834

Before Smith, Barksdale, and Haynes, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: * This case presents a second appeal (this time under 28 U.S.C. § 1291) from the same district court decision remanding the case to the Louisiana
state court. In Stewart v. Entergy Corp. , 35 F.4th 930, 931 (5th Cir. 2022) (per curiam) (“ Stewart I ”), the Defendants-Appellants in this case (“Entergy”) appealed the district court’s remand order under 28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1),

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Circuit Rule 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 12, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-30132 Document: 00516574568 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/12/2022No. 22-30132

2 regarding the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”). We need not repeat the facts set out in that opinion; suffice it to say that the Plaintiffs in this case brought a class action ag ainst Entergy based upon alleged negligence and other breaches that caused extensive power outages following Hurricane Ida
in southeast Louisiana in 2021. The district court concluded that CAFA jurisdiction did not apply and also reje cted the other allegations of federal question and bankruptcy jurisdiction.

In Stewart I , which addressed the CAFA jurisdiction issues, we concluded that CAFA did not provide jurisdiction because the statute’s local controversy and home state exceptions a pplied. 35 F.4th at 932–34. We also rejected the notion that our ability to address CAFA juri sdiction gave us jurisdiction to decide wh ether the district court properly remanded the case under federal question and bankruptcy arguments. Id. at 934–36; see 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (denying appellate jurisdiction over most appeals of jurisdictional remands). Following that decision, the Plaintiffs filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of juri sdiction, which the motions panel carried with the case. Based upon the decision in Stewart I and the lack of any exception to Section 1447(d) applying in this appeal, we conclude that the motion to dismiss should be granted. Accordingly, we DISMISS this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Case: 22-30132 Document: 00516574568 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/12/2022
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1295

THOMAS A. HOLLEY, In the matter of: Realy Novalla White: 

Deceased,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MICHAEL J. MCARTHUR, Superior Clerk of Court; BLAIR FUNERAL 

SERVICE; JESSIE HOLLEY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior 

District Judge. (3:10-cv-00001-REP)

Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 26, 2010

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas A. Holley, Appellant Pro Se. Robert L. O’Donnell, 

VANDEVENTER BLACK, LLP, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee; Jessie 

Holley, Appellee Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Thomas A. Holley appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his civil complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction 

and improper venue. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Holley v. McArthur, No. 3:10-cv-00001-

REP (E.D. Va. Feb. 25, 2010). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**Certification
      of Principal 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 Quarterly Report of SRKP 2, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony C.
      Pintsopoulos, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





/s/
                Anthony C. PintsopoulosAnthony
                C. Pintsopoulos
              Principal
                Financial Officer
              October
                14, 2008
§ 1781.24 State supplements and availability of bulletins, instructions, forms, and memorandums. ( a ) State supplements will be issued as needed in accordance with applicable provisions of part 1780 of this chapter.
( b ) Bulletins, instructions, forms and memorandums are available from any USDA/Rural Development office or the Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. 20250-1500.
Exhibit 32.2






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
Arena Resources, Inc. (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), I, William R. Broaddrick, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)           The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.















/s/  William R.
Broaddrick




William
R. Broaddrick


Chief
Financial Officer


March 1,
2010
#### Williamson *vs.*Boucher.

Traverse. Case 75.

Error to the. Bracken Cir uit; Roper, Judge.

*Forcible entry. Traverse. ' Irregularity.*

After a fraverse to the fnmiteteinn ani forcible eutry, it is too to^n^'irreTMíarity m the *253w.irrnn or either pr par-'d to i - - ceedings.

*252April 24.

Chief Justice Robertson,

delivered the Opinion of 'he Court.

In this case, the circuit court, on a traverse to an inquisition finding the traverser guilty of a forcible entry, charged in a warrant against him, quashed the warrant and set aside the proceedings in the country, on the motion of the traverser, after issue had been made up on the truth of the inquisition. The only reason assigned or perceived for such a judgment, by the circuit court, is, that the tinie for holding the inquisition was left blank in the warrant, and that it was held on the firs of March, although the warrant directed the officer to hold it some time in February.

As the party, against whom the warrant had been j«Sued, appeared before the justice and traversed the truth oi ,le inquisition, he could not take advantage, alter wards, oí any prior irregularity : all such irregularity in the preparatory proceed-'n"s was waived by the traverse to the circuit court, It was, therefore, too late (after the traverse, and *253especially after an issue as to its truth or falsehood h i í been concluded,) to object o -inv irregidarU\ in the warrant, even if anv such appeared; II. Bibb, 431; III. Monroe, 363; IV. Bibb, 501; I. J. J. Marshall, 45.

*Morehead*and Brown, for plaintiff; *Crittenden,*for defendant.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for further proceedings.
#### Percy E. Patrick, Jr., et al., Doing Business as Patrick Brothers, Respondents, v Michael E. Bodwitch, Appellant.

unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order at Special Term denying his motion for judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ action for specific performance and damages under a real estate purchase contract on the grounds that the contract is void and that the action is barred by the Statute of Limitations and the Statute of Frauds. On January 5, 1972 plaintiffs’ attorney drafted a proposed purchase offer which contained a *841provision that the offer must be accepted by January 10, 1972. Neither plaintiffs nor defendant saw the purchase offer until January 17, 1972, on which date one of the plaintiffs and the defendant signed it. Negotiations ensued concerning title problems with the property until March 22, 1979, when defendant informed plaintiffs’ attorney that he would not consummate the sale. Defendant contends that the contract is void because not accepted by January 10, 1972, as provided therein. When they signed the contract on January 17, 1972, the parties chose to treat the provision requiring acceptance by January 10 as a nullity. Subsequent actions of the parties consistent with the existence of a contract (e.g., negotiations concerning the title) confirm the finding that the parties did not consider the provision to be effective. Thus, the contract is valid and the transaction is not within the Statute of Frauds. The limitations period for the instant action did not begin to run until the date of the alleged breach on March 22, 1979. (Appeal from order of Oswego Supreme Court — dismiss complaint.) Present — Cardamone, J. P., Simons, Hancock, Jr., Doerr and Moule, JJ.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Apprenticeship.gov      

# Apprenticeship.gov

This website can help employers learn about models of apprenticeship as well the benefits of apprenticeship, such as recruiting a highly-skilled workforce, improving profitability, minimizing costs, and retaining workers. The site also walks employers through the process of posting their apprenticeship job listings online to attract job seekers to their positions. 

https://www.apprenticeship.gov
|  |  |  |  |  |
|--|--|--|--|--|
|  |  |  |  |

  Mississippi

> - (none)

----
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           The Adoption and Safe Families Act: Barriers to Reunification between Children and Incarcerated Parents      

# The Adoption and Safe Families Act: Barriers to Reunification between Children and Incarcerated Parents

This information packet, developed by the National Resource Center for Permanency and Family Connections and featured on the Children's Bureau website, addresses how certain provisions of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) create barriers to reunification for incarcerated mothers. The packet also includes information about amendments that some states have made to ASFA to address these issues, best practice tips for working with children of incarcerated parents, and other related resources    

https://cbexpress.acf.hhs.gov/index.cfm?event=website.viewArticles&issueid=139&articleID=3641&keywords=parental%20rights