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



Exhibit 32.2 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. In connection with the Quarterly Report of Front Range Capital Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alice
M. Voss, 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 results of
operations of the Company. /s/ Alice M. Voss
Alice M. Voss
Chief Financial Officer
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Front Range Capital and will be retained by Front Range Capital
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
H. R. 7508 

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1285 Emancipation Highway in Fredericksburg, Virginia, as the ‘‘Gladys P. Todd Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. GLADYS P. TODD POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 1285 Emancipation Highway in Fredericksburg, 

Virginia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Gladys P. Todd 

Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Gladys P. Todd Post Office’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### § 573.880 Normal propyl alcohol.

Normal propyl alcohol may be safely used in feeds and feed supplements for cattle as a source of metabolizable energy. It is incorporated in the feed or feed supplement in an amount which provides not more than 54.5 grams of the additive per head per day.
§ 556.275 Fenbendazole. ( a ) *Acceptable daily intake (ADI).* The ADI for total residue of fenbendazole is 40 μg/kg of body weight per day.
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for fenbendazole are: ( 1 ) *Cattle.* ( i ) Liver (target tissue): 0.8 ppm fenbendazole (marker residue).
( ii ) Milk: 0.22 ppm fenbendazole sulfoxide (marker residue).
( 2 ) *Chickens.* ( i ) Liver (target tissue): 5.2 ppm fenbendazole sulfone (marker residue).
( ii ) Eggs: 1.8 ppm fenbendazole sulfone (marker residue).
( 3 ) *Goats.* ( i ) Liver (target tissue): 0.8 ppm fenbendazole (marker residue).
( ii ) [Reserved]
( 4 ) *Swine.* ( i ) Liver (target tissue): 3.2 ppm fenbendazole (marker residue).
( ii ) [Reserved]
( 5 ) *Turkeys.* ( i ) Liver (target tissue): 6 ppm fenbendazole sulfone (marker residue).
( ii ) [Reserved]
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See §§ 520.905a, 520.905b, 520.905c, 520.905d, and 558.258 of this chapter.
[84 FR 32993, July 11, 2019, as amended at 86 FR 57998, Oct. 20, 2021; 86 FR 61686, Nov. 8, 2021]
From: Tim Pivetz, Battelle 

To: Cindy Wheeler, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Date: April 20, 2010 

Subject: Hard to Clean Floors from EPA Dust Study 

During the EPA Dust Study conducted in fall 2006, the study protocol required cleaning of floors 

and window sills in study rooms to below EPA clearance standards prior to the start of each 

experiment. The study protocol stated that following pre-experiment cleaning and collection of 

dust wipes by an independent licensed clearance technician “if the lead loading on the clearance 

wipes was no greater than 40 μg/ft2

 on floors and 250 μg/ft2 on window sills, the unit was 

declared clean. If one or more samples failed to meet these clearance standards, then the room in 

which that sample was collected was re-cleaned and re-sampled.” (p. 3-4, 11-14-07 Final Report) 

The pre-experiment cleanings were conducted by trained and experienced lead abatement 

workers or abatement cleaning specialists. 

In some housing units, floors and window sills in poor condition were difficult to clean resulting 

in dust wipes that returned measurements below clearance standards. For example, Housing 

Unit H09, which was utilized for a total of ten interior experiments, required multiple cleanings 

before four of those experiments (with the other experiments requiring only a single cleaning). 

There were four cases of a room needing two cleanings to get all floor dust wipe measurements 

below 40 μg/ft2

, and another case of three cleanings being required to clear a room. (Multiple 

rooms required re-cleaning once.) H09 had wood floors in poor condition (e.g., with significant 

gaps between the boards), and it was feared that despite repeated re-cleanings clearance would 

continue to be difficult to achieve. 

Because the clearance failures and re-cleanings were delaying the start of experiments and 

hampering the progress of the study, study management made the decision to coat the work room 

floor with polyurethane following the initial cleaning and prior to the clearance wipes being 

obtained. After some experience was gained, it was determined that the best product to use for 

purposes of the study was a quick-drying sealant manufactured by Parks called ProFinisher 

Universal Sealer Fast Drying Formula, Professional Grade, which was purchased at Home 

Depot. This product dried in as little as 45 minutes, which allowed the clearance technician to 

obtain wipe samples and submit them for analysis on the same day as the cleaning. 

Following the decision to coat floors with the sealant prior to clearance testing, there were little 

to no further clearance failures.
Editorial Note on Part 73
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 73 appear at 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001.

§ 73.185 Haematococcus algae meal. ( a ) *Identity.* ( 1 ) The color additive haematococcus algae meal consists of the comminuted and dried cells of the alga *Haematococcus pluvialis.*
( 2 ) Haematococcus algae meal may be added to the fish feed only as a component of a stabilized color additive mixture. Color additive mixtures for fish feed use made with haematococcus algae meal may contain only those diluents that are suitable and are listed in this subpart as safe for use in color additive mixtures for coloring foods.
( b ) *Specifications.* Haematococcus algae meal shall conform to the following specifications and shall be free from impurities other than those named to the extent that such impurities may be avoided by good manufacturing practice: Physical state, solid. Lead, not more than 5 parts per million. Arsenic, not more than 2 parts per million. Mercury, not more than 1 part per million. Heavy metals (as Pb), not more than 10 parts per million. Astaxanthin, not less than 1.5 percent.
( c ) *Uses and restrictions.* Haematococcus algae meal may be safely used in the feed of salmonid fish in accordance with the following prescribed conditions: ( 1 ) The color additive is used to enhance the pink to orange-red color of the flesh of salmonid fish.
( 2 ) The quantity of astaxanthin in finished feed, from haematococcus algae meal when used alone or in combination with other astaxanthin color additive sources listed in this part 73, shall not exceed 80 milligrams per kilogram (72 grams per ton) of finished feed.
( d ) *Labeling requirements.* ( 1 ) The labeling of the color additive and any premixes prepared therefrom shall bear expiration dates for the sealed and open container (established through generally accepted stability testing methods), other information required by § 70.25 of this chapter, and adequate directions to prepare a final product complying with the limitations prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.
( 2 ) The presence of the color additive in finished fish feed prepared according to paragraph (c) of this section shall be declared in accordance with § 501.4 of this chapter.
( 3 ) The presence of the color additive in salmonid fish that have been fed feeds containing haematococcus algae meal shall be declared in accordance with §§ 101.22(b), (c), and (k)(2), and 101.100(a)(2) of this chapter.
( e ) *Exemption from certification.* Certification of this color additive is not necessary for the protection of the public health, and therefore batches thereof are exempt from the certification requirements of section 721(c) of the act.
[65 FR 41584, July 6, 2000]
<PAGE>   1




                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1





                           SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY


           SUBSIDIARY                                   STATE OF INCORPORATION
           ----------                                   ----------------------

  Forcenergy International Inc.                                Delaware

  Forcenergy Phenix Marin Corp.                          British Virgin Islands

  Forcenergy Gryphon B.V.                                     Netherlands

  Forcenergy Resources Inc.                                      Texas

  Forcenergy Onshore Inc.                                      Delaware

  Forcenergy GOM Inc.                                          Delaware

  Forcenergy Ltd.                                           Cayman Islands

  Forcenergy Drilling Inc.                                     Delaware

  Edisto Energy Inc.                                             Texas

  Edisto Canada, Inc.                                           Canada

  Mint Holding Company                                           Texas

  Forcenergy Australia Pty. Ltd.                               Australia

  Forcenergy Gabon Ltd.                                         Liberia

  Forcenergy Invest AB                                          Sweden

  FAB Holding Co., L.L.C.                                      Delaware
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 4 (Thursday, January 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 993]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-42]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research; Notice of 
Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings 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 Dental and Craniofacial 
Research Special Emphasis Panel Review R13.
    Date: January 27, 2010.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Virtual Meeting)
    Contact Person: Mary Kelly, Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Branch, National Inst of Dental & Craniofacial 
Research, NIH 6701 Democracy Blvd., Room 672, MSC 4878, Bethesda, MD 
20892-4878, 301-594-4809, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d7bab6a5ae88bcb2bbbbae97b9bebff9b0b8a1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3d505c4f446256585151447d535455135a524b">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial 
Research Special Emphasis Panel Review R13.
    Date: January 29, 2010.
    Time: 2 p.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Virtual Meeting)
    Contact Person: Mary Kelly, Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Branch, National Inst of Dental & Craniofacial 
Research, NIH 6701 Democracy Blvd., Room 672, MSC 4878, Bethesda, MD 
20892-4878, 301-594-4809, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4a272b383315212f2626330a242322642d253c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="204d4152597f4b454c4c59604e49480e474f56">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.121, Oral 
Diseases and Disorders Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: December 30, 2009.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-42 Filed 1-6-10; 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>
§ 556.350 Levamisole. ( a ) [Reserved]
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for levamisole are: ( 1 ) *Cattle.* Edible tissues (excluding milk): 0.1 ppm.
( 2 ) *Sheep.* Edible tissues (excluding milk): 0.1 ppm.
( 3 ) *Swine.* Edible tissues: 0.1 ppm.
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See §§ 520.1242a, 520.1242b, 520.1242d, 520.1242e, 520.1242f, 520.1242g, 522.1242, and 524.1240 of this chapter.
§ 520.222 Bunamidine hydrochloride. ( a ) *Chemical name. N,N* -Dibutyl-4-(hexyloxy)-1-naphthamidine hydrochloride.
( b ) *Specifications.* The drug is an oral tablet containing 100, 200, or 400 milligrams of bunamidine hydrochloride.
( c ) *Sponsor.* See No. 000061 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( d ) *Conditions of use.* ( 1 ) The drug is intended for oral administration to dogs for the treatment of the tapeworms *Dipylidium caninum, Taenia pisiformis,* and *Echinococcus granulosus,* and to cats for the treatment of the tapeworms *Dipylidium caninum* and *Taenia taeniaeformis.*
( 2 ) It is administered to cats and dogs at the rate of 25 to 50 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. The drug should be given on an empty stomach and food should not be given for 3 hours following treatment.
( 3 ) Tablets should not be crushed, mixed with food, or dissolved in liquid. Repeat treatments should not be given within 14 days. The drug should not be given to male dogs within 28 days prior to their use for breeding. Do not administer to dogs or cats having known heart conditions.
( 4 ) For use only by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[40 FR 13838, Mar. 27, 1975, as amended at 42 FR 13018, Mar. 8, 1977; 46 FR 48642, Oct. 2, 1981; 61 FR 8873, Mar. 6, 1996; 62 FR 61624, Nov. 19, 1997]
§ 520.1060 Glucose and glycine. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each packet of powder contains 8.82 grams sodium chloride, 4.20 grams potassium phosphate, 0.5 gram citric acid anhydrous, 0.12 gram potassium citrate, 6.36 grams aminoacetic acid (glycine), and 44.0 grams glucose.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in calves* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Dissolve each packet in 2 quarts of warm water and administer to each calf as follows: ( i ) *Scouring and/or dehydrated calves.* Feed 2 quarts of solution, twice daily for 2 days (four feedings). No milk or milk replacer should be fed during this period. For the next four feedings (days 3 and 4), use 1 quart of solution together with 1 quart of milk replacer. Thereafter, feed as normal.
( ii ) *Newly purchased calves.* Feed 2 quarts of solution instead of milk as the first feed upon arrival. For the next scheduled feeding, use 1 quart of solution mixed together with 1 quart of milk or milk replacer. Thereafter, feed as normal.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For control of dehydration associated with diarrhea (scours); and as an early treatment at the first signs of scouring. It may also be used as followup treatment following intravenous fluid therapy.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* The product should not be used in animals with severe dehydration (down, comatose, or in a state of shock). Such animals need intravenous therapy. A veterinarian should be consulted in severely scouring calves. The product is not nutritionally complete if administered by itself for long periods of time. It should not be administered beyond the recommended treatment period without the addition of milk or milk replacer.
[79 FR 28821, May 20, 2014]
§ 606.140 Laboratory controls. Laboratory control procedures shall include: ( a ) The establishment of scientifically sound and appropriate specifications, standards and test procedures to assure that blood and blood components are safe, pure, potent and effective.
( b ) Adequate provisions for monitoring the reliability, accuracy, precision and performance of laboratory test procedures and instruments.
( c ) Adequate identification and handling of all test samples so that they are accurately related to the specific unit of product being tested, or to its donor, or to the specific recipient, where applicable.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 4, 2018

No. 04-18-00417-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.E.P. A CHILD,

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013 EM5-04455

Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On June 20, 2018, the trial court signed a final order in this suit to modify the parentchild relationship. Appellant Mom timely filed a motion for new trial—which the trial court 

granted. 

Later, the trial court set a hearing on temporary orders for August 30, 2018. On that date,

the trial court held the hearing and signed the parties’ agreement for temporary orders.

Generally, “an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment. A judgment is final for 

purposes of appeal if it disposes of all pending parties and claims in the record, except as 

necessary to carry out the decree.” Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 

2001). 

Temporary orders in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship are not subject to 

interlocutory appeal, Dancy v. Daggett, 815 S.W.2d 548, 549 (Tex. 1991) (per curiam), and are 

not final orders subject to regular appeal, In re Chester, 357 S.W.3d 103, 106 (Tex. App.—San 

Antonio 2011, no pet.). 

We ORDER Appellant to show cause to this court in writing within TEN DAYS of the 

date of this order why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.3(a). If Appellant does not timely file written proof as ordered, this appeal will be 

dismissed. See id. 

All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending further order of this court.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 4th day of October, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
# C_2015081EN.01000502.xml

| 9.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 81/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 81/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 11 December 2014 — Austro-Mechana Gesellschaft zur Wahrnehmung mechanisch-musikalischer Urheberrechte Gesellschaft mbH v Amazon EU Sàrl and Others

(Case C-572/14)

(2015/C 081/07)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Austro-Mechana Gesellschaft zur Wahrnehmung mechanisch-musikalischer Urheberrechte Gesellschaft mbH

Applicant:

Defendants: Amazon EU Sàrl, Amazon Services Europe Sàrl, Amazon.de GmbH, Amazon Logistik GmbH, Amazon Media Sàrl

Defendants:

Question referred

Question referred

Does a claim for payment of ‘fair compensation’ under Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (1) which, in accordance with Austrian law, is directed against undertakings that are first to place recording material on the domestic market on a commercial basis and for consideration constitute a claim arising from ‘tort, delict or quasi-delict’ within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (2)?

1

2

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10.

1

(2)  OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.

2

---
§ 315.2 Definition. For purposes of this part, *diagnostic radiopharmaceutical* means: ( a ) An article that is intended for use in the diagnosis or monitoring of a disease or a manifestation of a disease in humans and that exhibits spontaneous disintegration of unstable nuclei with the emission of nuclear particles or photons; or
( b ) Any nonradioactive reagent kit or nuclide generator that is intended to be used in the preparation of such article as defined in paragraph (a) of this section.
#### THE OTTAWA AND CHIPPEWA INDIANS OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN v. THE UNITED STATES.

[No. 27537.

Decided November 4, 1907.]

*On the claimants’ attorneys’ Motion.*

The jurisdictional act provides that *“if judgment he rendered for the petitioner,”*the court *“shall award a proper attorney fee for the attorneys of record.”*Judgment is rendered in favor of the claimants *(ante*p. 240) and the attornej's now produce a contract whereby the claimants agree to pay them 25 per cent of the judgment which may be recovered.

I.It is the duty of the attorneys of record in an Indian case to render reasonable services after judgment to the end that the roll upon which their clients will be paid shall be complete and just.

II.The court in such a case will direct that payment of a part of. the fee allowed be withheld until the services subsequent to ■ the judgment shall have been rendered.

III.Where the jurisdictional act provides that the court “ *shall award a proper attorney fee,”*the court can not consider, when fixing the amount of the fee, a contract between the claimants and the attorneys agreeing upon a rate of compensation.

*The Refortevs’*statement of the case:

The grounds of the motion will be found on the opinion of the court.

*Mr. Chester Howe*and *Messrs. Dudley & Michener*for the motion.

*Mr. Franklin W. Collins*(with whom was *Mr. Assistant Attorney-General Van Orsdel)*for the defendants.

PeR Cueiam:

The court, upon motion of the attorneys for the claimant, has made an order allowing as attorneys’ fees 15 per cent of the judgment allowed to the claimants, 12- per cent to be paid out of any funds available therefor, and the-balance of 8 per cent to be paid when the roll of the claimant Indians shall be completed and approved.

*519The payment of a part of the attorneys’ fees allowed has been deferred, as stated, for the reason that the court considers that it is the duty of the claimants’ attorneys to render all reasonable services to the end that the roll shall be complete and just; and hence until such completion their duties in the case will not all have been discharged. That some professional services in that behalf, within the limits of professional ethics, can be rendered seems apparent to the court.

It may be well to add that upon the hearing of this motion the claimants’ attorneys presented to the court a contract entered into by them with the- claimants providing for the payment of an attorneys’ fee of 25 per cent of. the amount of the judgment; but this was not taken into consideration by the court for the reason that the jurisdictional act provides “ that the Court of Claims shall advance- said cause upon the docket, and, if judgment be rendered for the petitioner, shall award a proper attorney fee for the attorneys of record, to be paid on separate warrants from the amount recovered.”