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

                                   Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
            RULE 13a-14(1) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SEC. 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection  with the quarterly  report of Endeavor Energy  Corporation,  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Cameron
King,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and Chief  Financial  Officer of the  Company,
certify  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Sec. 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 operation of
          the company.


Date:   August 16, 2007                     /s/ Cameron King
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Chief Executive Officer and
                                            Chief Financial Officer

















--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 1 of 2

Case No: 4:08cv324-RH/WCS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

FLORIDA WILDLIFE

FEDERATION, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

CONSOLIDATED CASE

v. CASE NO. 4:08cv324-RH/WCS

LISA P. JACKSON, etc., et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

ORDER EXTENDING THE DEADLINES

FOR PROPOSED AND FINAL RULES FOR

COASTAL AND ESTUARINE WATERS

The consented motion, ECF No. 357, to further extend specific deadlines 

established under the consent decree entered December 30, 2009, ECF No. 153, is 

GRANTED. The deadline for the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency to sign for publication a proposed regulation setting out numeric waterCase 4:08-cv-00324-RH-WCS Document 359 Filed 03/02/12 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 4:08cv324-RH/WCS

quality criteria for coastal and estuarine waters and South Florida flowing waters is 

extended to May 21, 2012. The deadline for the Administrator to sign for 

publication a notice of final rulemaking for these waters is extended to January 7, 

2013.

SO ORDERED on March 2, 2012.

s/Robert L. Hinkle

United States District Judge

Case 4:08-cv-00324-RH-WCS Document 359 Filed 03/02/12 Page 2 of 2
|  |  | **The Use of Computerized Mapping in Crime Control and Prevention Programs****July 1995**
Computerized mapping has many crime prevention and control applications. Mapping software's unique ability to overlay disparate data sets makes it an excellent tool for identifying factors related to the multidimensional, multifaceted crime problem. On the basis of a literature review and telephone interviews, this Research in Action focuses on some specific applications by police departments, community organizations, multiagency task forces, and other types of government agencies that use mapping technologies in crime control and prevention programs; assesses the overall utility of these technologies; and identifies some obstacles to increased use of mapping.
Full text of Report:
- ASCII Text File  Adobe Acrobat File
What's New | Programs | Funding | Publications | Contact NIJ | About NIJNIJ-Related Sites | Search | Home
  |
|--|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
98-1684.

#### State ex rel. Manos v. Speese.

Reported at 83 Ohio St.3d 1423, 699 N.E.2d 96. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.

Douglas and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., dissent,

would grant the motion for reconsideration, vacate the administrative entry of dismissal, and grant relators’ motion to dismiss per Civ.R. 41.
## Conservation Stewardship Program

Contracts and Dollars Obligated On Active Contracts

- Contract Fiscal Year 2010

State Number of

Contracts Total Treated

Acres Dollars

Obligated

Alabama 431 348,905 $4,087,316 Alaska 14 182,565 $1,329,565 Arizona 56 821,643 $4,003,337 Arkansas 620 569,519 $11,187,938 California 337 721,128 $5,975,203 Colorado 469 1,264,376 $11,746,128 Connecticut 13 8,467 $52,907 Delaware 25 14,448 $349,904 Florida 95 65,279 $1,216,126 Georgia 584 354,906 $10,245,599 Hawaii 16 7,098 $105,873 Idaho 202 351,087 $4,143,039 Illinois 542 402,697 $8,696,724 Indiana 308 211,565 $5,212,795 Iowa 1,480 797,605 $20,255,574 Kansas 872 1,216,415 $18,000,610 Kentucky 182 62,111 $928,525 Louisiana 321 264,940 $5,554,729 Maine 102 70,381 $528,394 Maryland 65 24,249 $741,914 Massachusetts 11 7,324 $58,135 Michigan 544 229,963 $4,678,331 Minnesota 1,575 915,761 $21,377,320 Mississippi 319 352,265 $8,980,074 Missouri 1,939 976,001 $16,557,469 Montana 486 1,810,055 $15,066,536 Nebraska 1,106 1,836,928 $20,152,534 Nevada 17 23,829 $300,124 New Hampshire 17 3,430 $46,650 New Jersey 9 2,468 $71,225 New Mexico 172 1,478,740 $5,412,752 New York 321 159,602 $3,287,632 North Carolina 167 67,414 $1,054,090 

### Page 1 of 1 Contracts and Dollars Obligated On Active Contracts

- Contract Fiscal Year 2010 | NRCS

1/18/2012 file://M:\Project\Nutrients

- OST\4

-FL Estuary Criteria\15

- Economic Analysis\Econ Ref

...
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

PLASTERER EQUIPMENT CO., INC., 

v.

REGIONAL ORTHOPEDIC 

ASSOCIATES, P.C.,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 468 MAL 2018

Cross Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal from the Order of the Superior 

Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 7th day of January, 2019, the Cross Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED.

Cross Petitioner
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO.: 4:03cr10-SPM

TIMOTHY RESHARD MEEKS

Defendant.

____________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REDUCE UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3582

This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Timothy Reshard

Meeks’ Motion to Reduce Sentence (doc. 72) pursuant to the retroactive crack

cocaine amendment (Amendments 706 and 711) and 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c).

An application of the amendment results in no change to Defendant’s

guideline range because of the career offender enhancement, which sets

Defendant’s offense level at 37. With a 3 point reduction for acceptance of

responsibility, Defendant’s total offense level remains at level 34, and his

guideline range remains 262-327 months as originally calculated. Accordingly, it

is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion to Reduce Sentence (doc.

72) is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 24th day of March, 2008.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 4:03-cr-00010-RH-CAS Document 75 Filed 03/24/08 Page 1 of 1
#### O’CONNALL, Appellant, v. THOMPSON-STARRATT CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 12, 1906.)

Action by Bernard O’Connall, as administrator, against the Thompson-Starratt Company. A. Ledwith, for appellant. J. Ford, for 'respondent.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
#### §§ 3550.165-3550.199 [Reserved]
###### Editorial Note on Part 3400

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3400 appear at 76 FR 4806, Jan. 27, 2011.

#### § 3400.12 Conflicts of interest.

Members of peer review groups covered by this part are subject to relevant provisions contained in Title 18 of the United States Code relating to criminal activity, Department regulations governing employee responsibilities and conduct (part O of this title), and Executive Order 11222, as amended.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2319 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2319

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen

                                 An Act

 
To clarify certain provisions of the Native American Veterans' Memorial 
                       Establishment Act of 1994.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
    This Act may be cited as the ``Native American Veterans' Memorial 
Amendments Act of 2013''.
SEC. 2. NATIVE AMERICAN VETERANS' MEMORIAL.
    (a) Authority To Establish Memorial.--Section 3 of the Native 
American Veterans' Memorial Establishment Act of 1994 (20 U.S.C. 80q-5 
note; 108 Stat. 4067) is amended--
        (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``within the interior 
    structure of the facility provided for by'' and inserting ``on 
    property under the jurisdiction of the Museum on the site described 
    in''; and
        (2) in subsection (c)(1), by striking ``, in consultation with 
    the Museum, is'' and inserting ``and the National Museum of the 
    American Indian are''.
    (b) Payment of Expenses.--Section 4(a) of the Native American 
Veterans' Memorial Establishment Act of 1994 (20 U.S.C. 80q-5 note; 108 
Stat. 4067) is amended--
        (1) in the heading, by inserting ``and National Museum of the 
    American Indian'' after ``American Indians''; and
        (2) in the first sentence, by striking ``shall be solely'' and 
    inserting ``and the National Museum of the American Indian shall 
    be''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO.: 4:02-CR-47-SPM

CEDRIC O. ROBINSON,

Defendant.

______________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REDUCE UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3582

This cause comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion for modification of

sentence (doc. 63) pursuant to the retroactive crack cocaine amendment (Amendment

750) and 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The Government filed a response in opposition (doc.

64) and Defendant filed a reply (doc. 65).

Upon review, the Court finds that Defendant is not entitled to a sentence

reduction because application of the guideline amendment results in no change to his

sentencing range. Defendant’s sentence was not imposed pursuant to § 2D1.1 of the

United States Sentencing Guidelines, which has been amended. Defendant’s sentence

was subject to § 4B1.1 because he was a career offender, which resulted in an offense

level of 34 and a guideline range of 262 to 327 months. Defendant’s imprisonment was

guided by his Career Offender status as opposed to the Sentencing Guidelines. As a

result, Defendant’s sentence is not affected by the crack cocaine amendment.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion Under 18 USC §

3582(c)(2) for Modification of Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (doc. 63) is

denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 17th day of January, 2012.

S/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Senior United States District Judge

2
### THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVID ED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court

Travis Montre Smith, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2013-001696

ON WRI T OF CERTIORARI

Appeal from Spartanburg County The Honorable J. Mark Hayes, II, Circuit Court Judge

Opinion No. 2015-MO-066 Submitted October 15, 2015 – Filed November 18, 2015

CERTIORARI DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Petitioner.Attorney General Alan M. Wilson and Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Ka ren C. Ratigan, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: We granted certiorari to review the dismissal of Travis Montre Smith's application for post-conviction relief. We now dismiss the writ as improvidently granted.

DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED



### TOAL, C.J., BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur. PLEICONES, J., not participating.
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 .*

§ 1437.303 Aquaculture, including ornamental fish. ( a ) Aquaculture is a value loss crop and will have NAP assistance calculated only in accord with restrictions set in this section. Eligible aquacultural species only include: ( 1 ) Any species of aquatic organisms grown as food for human consumption as determined by CCC.
( 2 ) Fish raised as feed for other fish that are consumed by humans; and
( 3 ) Ornamental fish propagated and reared in an aquatic medium.
( b ) The aquacultural facility must be: ( 1 ) A commercial enterprise on private property;
( 2 ) Owned or leased by the producer, with readily identifiable boundaries; and
( 3 ) Managed and maintained using good aquacultural growing practices.
( c ) Producers must: ( 1 ) Ensure adequate and proper flood prevention, growing medium, fertilization or feeding, irrigation and water quality, predator control, and disease control; and
( 2 ) Have control of the waterbed.
( d ) Eligible aquacultural species must be: ( 1 ) Placed in the facility and not be indigenous to the facility; and
( 2 ) Kept in a controlled environment; and
( 3 ) Planted or seeded in containers, wire baskets, net pens, on ropes, or similar device designed for the protection and containment of the seeded aquacultural species.
( e ) For mollusks that are not planted or seeded in containers, net pens, on ropes, wire baskets, or similar device designed for the containment and protection of the mollusks, the only eligible cause of loss of mollusks or missing mollusk inventory will be a direct result of a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-determined tropical storm, typhoon, or hurricane.
( f ) In the crop year in which a notice of loss is filed, producers may be required, at the discretion of CCC, to provide evidence that the aquacultural species are produced in a facility in accordance with paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of this section.
( g ) If all other eligibility provisions of this part are determined by FSA to be satisfied, assistance will be provided to producers for eligible NAP aquaculture crop losses that are the direct result of drought.
[67 FR 12448, Mar. 19, 2002, as amended at 78 FR 21019, Apr. 9, 2013; 79 FR 74581, Dec. 15, 2014]
# L_2021104EN.01005501.xml

| 25.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 104/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 104/55

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1812 of 1 December 2020 laying down rules on the online data exchange and the notification of EU type-approvals under Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 404 of 2 December 2020
  )

On page 6, in Article 2(c):

for:

'a fine grained access control system that makes it possible to grant, read or write permissions for the access of authorised parties.',

read:

'a fine grained access control system that makes it possible to grant read or write permissions for the access of authorised parties.'

---
#### § 29.29 Regulations.

Rules and regulations of the Secretary under the Act.
98-1353.

#### State ex rel. Taylor v. Bedford Hts. Police Dept.

In Mandamus. On motion to dismiss. Motion to dismiss sustained. Cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

Lundberg Stratton, J., dissents.
§ 3430.505 Funding restrictions. ( a ) *Construction.* Funds made available for grants under this subsection shall not be used for the construction of a new building or facility or the acquisition, expansion, remodeling, or alteration of an existing building or facility (including site grading and improvement, and architect fees).
( b ) *Indirect Costs.* Subject to § 3430.54, indirect costs are allowable.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 4:03cr61-SPM/AK

MELVIN T. MARTIN,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Presently before the Court is Defendant’s pro se § 2255 motion in which Defendant

challenges the execution of his sentence by the Bureau of Prisons. Doc. 58. He does not claim

that his conviction or sentence is unconstitutional or otherwise in violation of federal law. 

Instead, he complains that the BOP has refused to give him credit for time he served in state

prison after the Court ordered that his federal sentence was to run concurrently with his state

court sentence which has now been completed. Consequently, the Court is without jurisdiction

to entertain this motion, which must be filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the district of

confinement. Fernandez v. United States, 941 F.2d 1488, 1495 (11th Cir.1991) (§ 2241 petitions

may be brought only in district court for district in which inmate is incarcerated). The motion to

vacate should therefore be denied. The Court notes that Defendant has also requested

amendment of the judgment, Doc. 53, and moved for credit under 5G1.3(b), Doc. 54, both of

Case 4:03-cr-00061-MW-CAS Document 59 Filed 04/20/09 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 4:03cr61-SPM/AK

which are related to the issue of credit for the service of the state court sentence. The

Government has submitted evidence in connection with the latter motion which indicates that the

issue has been resolved, and that Defendant has been given credit for the time he served in state

custody. See Docs. 56 & 57.

In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that Defendant’s motion

to vacate, Doc. 58, be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

IN CHAMBERS at Gainesville, Florida, this 20th day of April, 2009.

s/ A. KORNBLUM 

ALLAN KORNBLUM

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party’s objections within 10 days after

being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review

of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case 4:03-cr-00061-MW-CAS Document 59 Filed 04/20/09 Page 2 of 2
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 255 

To amend certain definitions contained in the Provo River Project Transfer 

Act for purposes of clarifying certain property descriptions, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 15, 2013 

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

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend certain definitions contained in the Provo River 

Project Transfer Act for purposes of clarifying certain 

property descriptions, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CLARIFYING CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIP4 TIONS IN PROVO RIVER PROJECT TRANSFER 

5 ACT. 

6 (a) PLEASANT GROVE PROPERTY.—Section 2(4)(A) 

7 of the Provo River Project Transfer Act (Public Law 108– 

8 382; 118 Stat. 2212) is amended by striking ‘‘of enactVerDate Mar 15 2010 03:03 Jan 16, 2013 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H255.IH H255

tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with 
2 

•HR 255 IH

1 ment of this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘on which the parcel is 

2 conveyed under section 3(a)(2)’’. 

3 (b) PROVO RESERVOIR CANAL.—Section 2(5) of the 

4 Provo River Project Transfer Act (Public Law 108–382; 

5 118 Stat. 2212) is amended— 

6 (1) by striking ‘‘canal, and any associated land, 

7 rights-of-way, and facilities’’ and inserting ‘‘water 

8 conveyance facility historically known as the Provo 

9 Reservoir Canal and all associated bridges, fixtures, 

10 structures, facilities, lands, interests in land, and 

11 rights-of-way held,’’; 

12 (2) by inserting ‘‘and forebay’’ after ‘‘Diversion 

13 Dam’’; 

14 (3) by inserting ‘‘near the Jordan Narrows to 

15 the point where water is discharged to the Welby16 Jacob Canal and the Utah Lake Distributing Canal’’ 

17 after ‘‘Penstock’’; and 

18 (4) by striking ‘‘of enactment of this Act’’ and 

19 inserting ‘‘on which the Provo Reservoir Canal is 

20 conveyed under section 3(a)(1)’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2012-0142

Directorate Identifier: 2010NM275AD

A670BA-29-011, RA --- 7/27/10

A670BA-29-011 --- 10/18/07

A670BA-29-012, RA --- 7/27/10

A670BA-29-012 --- 3/13/08

670BA-29-013, RA --- 7/27/10

670BA-29-013 --- 1/29/10

A670BA-32-021, RC --- 7/27/10

A670BA-32-021, RB --- 10/18/07

A670BA-32-021, RA --- 3/7/07

A670BA-32-021 --- 11/21/06

670BA-32-026, RA --- 7/27/10

670BA-32-026 --- 1/29/10

670BA-32-028 --- 12/22/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008