alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joyce G. *701Duntley, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Essex County, rendered June 7, 1978, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of burglary in the second degree and criminally negligent homicide. We have carefully examined all of the issues presented by defendant on this appeal and conclude that only a few of them merit discussion. Her pretrial motion to suppress a written confession was properly resolved. The trial court obviously discredited her version of the circumstances under which it was obtained, as it had a perfect right to do, and the testimony of the remaining witnesses established, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the challenged statement was voluntarily given following proper *Miranda*admonitions. Reviewing the totality of pertinent circumstances (see *People v Chaffee,*42 AD2d 172), we briefly note that the actual *interrogation*was of short duration; that defendant was allowed to and did converse with a friend; and that she, as well as the police, had made arrangements for the care of her children. While this recitation does not exhaust the list of relevant considerations, we are satisfied that there is no basis for disturbing the trial court’s findings and conclusions in denying the motion. Defendant’s argument concerning the introduction of a certain receipt during trial appears to be founded on the supposed invalidity and irregular execution of a search warrant. However, the record discloses that the exhibit was obtained pursuant to her consent. Although a number of specific objections were raised at the time, none questioned the adequacy of that consent. As for her attack on the sufficiency of the proof relating to the burglary charge, defendant did not claim that any permission she may have had to be on the premises extended beyond the porch areas and, in any event, it was for the jury to determine the significance of the indications of forcible entry into the dwelling proper. Defendant’s contentions involving the conduct of the trial, including the charge to the jury and requests made by it, fail to demonstrate that any prejudicial error was committed by the trial court. We do not believe that any reasonable view of the evidence justified the submission of criminally negligent homicide to the jury as a lesser included offense of second degree manslaughter (cf. *People v Strong,*37 NY2d 568, 570-571), but there was no exception to the submission. Accordingly, any apparent inconsistency in the verdict actually rendered is not reviewable (CPL 300.50, subd 1). Judgment affirmed. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Staley, Jr., Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
§ 400.456 Governmentwide debarment and suspension (nonprocurement). ( a ) FCIC will proceed under 2 CFR parts 180 and 417 when taking action to suspend or debar persons involved in non-procurement transactions.
( b ) Any person suspended or debarred under the provisions of 2 CFR parts 180 and 417, will not be eligible to contract with FCIC or the Risk Management Agency and will not be eligible to participate in or receive any benefit from any program under the Act during the period of ineligibility. This includes, but is not limited to, being employed by or contracting with any approved insurance provider, or its contractors, that sell, service, or adjust policies either insured or reinsured by FCIC. FCIC may waive this provision if it is satisfied that the approved insurance provider or contractors have taken sufficient action to ensure that the suspended or debarred person will not be involved in any way with the Federal crop insurance program or receive any benefit from any program under the Act.
( c ) The Manager, FCIC, shall be the debarring and suspending official for all debarment or suspension proceedings undertaken by FCIC under the provisions of 2 CFR parts 180 and 417.
[73 FR 76890, Dec. 18, 2008, as amended at 83 FR 25361, June 1, 2018]
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2012-1128 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2012-SW-064-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

 Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
#### § 3555.3 Civil rights.

Rural Development, lenders, and their agents must administer the program fairly, and in accordance with both the letter and the spirit of all equal opportunity, equal credit opportunity and fair housing legislation, and applicable executive orders. Loan guarantees, services, and benefits provided under this part shall not be denied to any person based on race, color, national origin, sex, religion, marital status, familial status, age (provided the applicant has the capacity to enter into a binding contract), handicap, receipt of income from public assistance, sexual orientation, or because the applicant has, in good faith, exercised any right under the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1601 *et seq.*). All activities under this part shall be accomplished in accordance with the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601-3620), the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (15 U.S.C. 1691), and Executive Order 11063 as amended by Executive Order 12259, as applicable. Rural Development's civil rights compliance requirements are provided in 7 CFR part 1901, subpart E.
CONSENT OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

Gary V. Campbell, CPA, Ltd.
To Whom It May Concern:

We consent to the use of Datascension, Inc. on Form 10-KSB of our
Auditors Report, dated March 30, 2004, on  the balance sheet  of
Datascension,  Inc.  as  of  December 31, 2003  and  the  related
statement of income and accumulated deficit from  January 1, 2004
to December 31, 2004, changes in  stockholders equity,  and cash
flows for the year ended December 31, 2003.

/s/ Gary V. Campbell, CPA
-------------------------
Gary V. Campbell, CPA, Ltd.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification ofChief Executive Officer**

**Pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer ofTransMontaigne Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), herebycertifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:

(a)          the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006, filed on thedate hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

|        | /s/ DONALD H. ANDERSON    |
|--------|---------------------------|
|   | Donald H. Anderson        |
|   | *Chief Executive Officer* |
|   | May 9, 2006          |

 

----
Exhibit
32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNTIED STATES CODE,


as
adopted pursuant to


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the annual report of Theragenics Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, M.
Christine Jacobs, 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 as of the dates
and for the periods referred to in the Report.





Date:
March 13, 2009






/s/ M. Christine
Jacobs


M.
Christine Jacobs


Chief
Executive Officer
# L_2020381EN.01000601.xml

| 13.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 381/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 381/6

---

COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/1695

of 12 November 2020

implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (1), and in particular Article 46(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 23 March 2012 the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 267/2012. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 23 March 2012 the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 267/2012.

| (2) | On 18 June 2020 the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2020/847 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 18 June 2020 the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2020/847 (2).

| (3) | Following the judgment of the General Court in Case T-490/18 (3), Neda Industrial Group should be removed from the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures set out in Annex IX to Regulation (EU) No 267/2012. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Following the judgment of the General Court in Case T-490/18 (3), Neda Industrial Group should be removed from the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures set out in Annex IX to Regulation (EU) No 267/2012.

| (4) | Annex IX to Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Annex IX to Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex IX to Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 12 November 2020.

For the Council

The President

M. ROTH

---

(1)  
  OJ L 88, 24.3.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/847 of 18 June 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ L 196, 19.6.2020, p. 1).

2

(3)  Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020, Neda Industrial Group v Council of the European Union, T-490/18, ECLI:EU:T:2020:318.

3

Neda Industrial Group v Council of the European Union

---

ANNEX

In Regulation (EU) No 267/2012, Annex IX, Part I, Section B (Entities), the following entry is deleted:

| ‘47. | Neda Industrial Group’. |
| --- | --- |

‘47.

Neda Industrial Group’.

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Cosmo Lombardozzi, Respondent.

Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered April 11, 1978, which, *inter alia,*granted defendant’s motion to (1) suppress the minutes of his testimony before a Kings County Grand Jury, upon the ground that such testimony constituted evidence derived from intercepted communications previously suppressed by order of the same court, dated May 6, 1977, and (2) dismiss the indictment charging defendant with criminal contempt in the first degree, upon the ground that absent the suppressed Grand Jury testimony, the People could not proceed to trial. Order reversed, on the law, and indictment reinstated. The defendant was indicted for criminal contempt in the first degree in that the defendant "gave answers that were evasive, equivocal and specious, in that such answers were given to mislead, confuse and deceive the Grand Jury in its investigation, said answers being tantamount to no answerfs] at all, being employed as a subterfuge on the part of the witness to avoid answering the questions propounded to him.” Thereafter the court granted a motion to suppress the tapes of certain conversations on the ground that the People had delayed in the sealing of the tapes, without satisfactory explanation. The defendant then moved to (1) suppress the minutes of his testimony before the Grand Jury on the theory that they were the fruit of the inadmissible tapes, and (2) dismiss the indictment because criminal contempt could not lie in the absence of the minutes. Criminal Term granted the motion. We reverse. The record shows that the defendant did not object to any question before the Grand Jury on the ground that it was based on unlawful electronic eavesdropping. But beyond this, the illegality of the surveillance "is available to a witness, however, only where he remains silent refusing to testify before the Grand Jury. It is not available to a witness who although choosing to testify does so in an evasive, equivocal or patently false manner.” *(People v McGrath,*46 NY2d 12, 29.) Here, the indictment clearly alleges that the claimed contempt is predicated on the defendant’s evasive and equivocal answers, and not on his refusal to answer. Hopkins, J. P., Titone, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2387 

To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a national cemetery 

for veterans in the Pikes Peak Region of Colorado. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 8, 2006 

Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. SALAZAR) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a 

national cemetery for veterans in the Pikes Peak Region 

of Colorado. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL CEMETERY IN 

4 THE PIKES PEAK REGION. 

5 (a) DEFINED TERM.—In this Act, the term ‘‘Pikes 

6 Peak region’’ means the geographic area consisting of the 

7 following counties in Colorado: 

8 (1) Teller. 

9 (2) El Paso. 

10 (3) Fremont. 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•S 2387 IS

1 (4) Pueblo. 

2 (b) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

3 shall establish, in accordance with chapter 24 of title 38, 

4 United States Code, a national cemetery in the Pikes 

5 Peaks region to serve the needs of veterans and their fami6 lies. 

7 (c) CONSULTATION IN SELECTION OF SITE.—Before 

8 selecting the site for the national cemetery to be estab9 lished under subsection (b), the Secretary shall consult 

10 with— 

11 (1) appropriate officials of the State of Colo12 rado and local officials in the Pikes Peaks region; 

13 and 

14 (2) appropriate officials of the United States, 

15 including the Administrator of General Services, 

16 with respect to land belonging to the United States 

17 in that area that would be suitable to establish the 

18 national cemetery under subsection (b). 

19 (d) AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT DONATION OF PARCEL

20 OF LAND.— 

21 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may accept 

22 on behalf of the United States the gift of an appro23 priate parcel of real property. The Secretary shall 

24 have administrative jurisdiction over such parcel of 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

•S 2387 IS

1 real property, and shall use such parcel to establish 

2 the national cemetery under subsection (b). 

3 (2) INCOME TAX TREATMENT OF GIFT.—For 

4 purposes of Federal income, estate, and gift taxes, 

5 the real property accepted under paragraph (1) shall 

6 be considered a gift to the United States. 

7 (e) REPORT.—As soon as practicable after the date 

8 of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 

9 to Congress a report on the establishment of the national 

10 cemetery under subsection (b). The report shall set forth 

11 a schedule for the establishment of the national cemetery 

12 and an estimate of the costs associated with the establish13 ment of the national cemetery. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM PICTURETEL'S
BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JULY 4, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-Q FILING.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-04-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          49,944
<SECURITIES>                                    43,800
<RECEIVABLES>                                   78,156
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (6,433)
<INVENTORY>                                     36,130
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               219,755
<PP&E>                                         209,440
<DEPRECIATION>                               (118,564)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 342,441
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,311
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           30,500
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           404
<OTHER-SE>                                     143,717
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   342,441
<SALES>                                        162,156
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               162,156
<CGS>                                          110,909
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  110,909
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               107,718
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,499
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (55,745)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,057
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (57,802)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (57,802)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (1.57)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.57)


</TABLE>
§ 4288.112 Eligibility notifications. ( a ) *Applicant eligibility.* If an applicant is determined by the Agency to be eligible for participation, the Agency will notify the applicant, in writing, as soon as practicable after receipt of the application and will assign the applicant a contract number.
( b ) *Ineligibility notifications.* If an applicant or a biofuel is determined by the Agency to be ineligible, the Agency will notify the applicant, in writing, as soon as practicable after receipt of the application, as to the reason(s) the applicant or biofuel was determined to be ineligible. Such applicant will have appeal rights as specified in this subpart.
( c ) *Subsequent ineligibility determinations.* If at any time a producer or an advanced biofuel is determined to be ineligible, the Agency will notify the producer in writing of its determination.
**EXHIBIT 13.1**

 

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002*

 

In connection with the annual report of North American Nickel Inc. (formerly Widescope Resources Inc.) (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Keith Morrison, 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 containing the financial statements of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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: April 18, 2017 |   |
|---------------------------|--------|
|                      |   |
| /s/ Keith Morrison        |   |
| Keith Morrison            |   |
| Chief Executive Officer   |   |

 

----

* A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
#### Mary Owczarzak, as executrix of the estate of Paulina Ropacki, deceased, appellee, v. Walter Ropacki et al., appellants.

Gen. No. 37,664.

Opinion filed November 19, 1934.

Joseph *X.*Waynne, for appellants. William T. Diekerman, for appellee.

Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.
9.110 Reserve Officer Training Corps and

military recruiting on campus.

9.110-1 Definitions.

9.110-2 Authority

9.110-3 Policy.

9.110-4 Procedures.

9.110-5 Contract clause.

Parent topic: Subpart 9.1 - Responsible Prospective Contractors
|   |                                                                 |   |  |   |  |   |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--|--------|--|--------|
|   |   
**The Rehab Guide Volume 3: Roofs**
**FULL TEXT:** |
#### Office of Disciplinary Counsel *v.*Bell.

[Cite as *Disciplinary Counsel v. Bell*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 310.]

(No. 98-718

Submitted May 27, 1998

Decided September 30, 1998.)

*311
      *Jonathan E. Coughlan,*Disciplinary Counsel, and *Harold F. Craig III,*Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.

*John Ashley Bell, pro se.*

*Per Curiam.*

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded. Costs taxed to respondent.

*Judgment accordingly.*

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
#### § 4280.448 Transfers and assumptions.

The Agency will approve transfer and assumption requests on grants awarded under this subpart on a case by case basis, and then only to eligible entities under § 4280.416.
#### § 3200.5 Dollar limitation.

There is no dollar limitation on excess personal property obtained under these procedures.