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

[House Report 106-942]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-942

======================================================================

 
WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 
          3244, THE TRAFFICKING VICTIMS PROTECTION ACT OF 2000

                                _______
                                

  October 5, 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

Ms. Pryce of Ohio, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 613]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 613, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                summary of provisions of the resolution

    The resolution waives all points of order against the 
conference report to accompany H.R. 3244, the Trafficking 
Victims Protection Act of 2000 and against its consideration. 
The rule further provides that the conference report shall be 
considered as read.

                                  

```
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the quarterly report of Bell Microproducts Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, W. Donald Bell, 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 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.


March 16, 2005                                /s/ W. Donald Bell
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 11

                   Premier Exhibitions, Inc. and Subsidiaries
                   Computation of Net Income (Loss) Per Share
                                   (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                    Three months
                                                                    ended May 31,
                                                          -----------------------------------
                                                                2004              2005
                                                          -----------------------------------

                                                          -----------------------------------
<S>                                                           <C>               <C>
Net income (loss)                                                $ (875,000)       $ 455,000
                                                          ===================================


Weighted average number of common                                19,240,047       22,299,939
  shares outstanding

Common equivalent shares
  representing shares issuable
  upon exercise of outstanding
  warrants and options                                                    -        2,650,000
                                                          -----------------------------------
                                                                 19,240,047       24,949,939
                                                          ===================================


 Net income (loss) per share:
    Basic                                                           $ (0.05)          $ 0.02
                                                          ===================================

    Diluted                                                         $ (0.05)          $ 0.02
                                                          ===================================
</TABLE>


Basic income (loss) per share of common stock is computed based on the average
number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS includes the
potential conversion of warrants and convertible notes that are dilutive. Stock
options are not considered in the diluted EPS calculation for those periods with
net losses, as the impact of the potential common shares would be to decrease
loss per share.
#### § 600.1 The Farm Credit Act.

The Farm Credit Act of 1971, Public Law 92-181 recodified and replaced the prior laws under which the Farm Credit Administration (FCA) and the institutions of the Farm Credit System (System or FCS) were organized and operated. The prior laws, which were repealed and superseded by the Act, are identified in section 5.40(a) of the Act. Subsequent amendments to the Act and enactment dates are as follows: Public Law 94-184, December 31, 1975; Public Law 95-443, October 10, 1978; Public Law 96-592, December 24, 1980; Public Law 99-190, December 19, 1985; Public Law 99-198, December 23, 1985; Public Law 99-205, December 23, 1985; Public Law 99-509, October 21, 1986; Public Law 100-233, January 6, 1988; Public Law 100-399, August 17, 1988; Public Law 100-460, October 1, 1988; Public Law 101-73, August 9, 1989; Public Law 101-220, December 12, 1989; Public Law 101-624, November 28, 1990; Public Law 102-237, December 13, 1991; Public Law 102-552, October 28, 1992; Public Law 103-376, October 19, 1994; Public Law 104-105, February 10, 1996; Public Law 104-316, October 19, 1996; Public Law 107-171, May 13, 2002; Public Law 110-246, June 18, 2008. The law is codified at 12 U.S.C. 2000, *et seq.*

[80 FR 68428, Nov. 5, 2015]
p.1 

OAR Box 1384 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

^Document Number: 

§?iJX$) U-E-W8 

Docket Number: 

A-94-52 

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:11 AM Sheet 218 of 264 
0^,;\ft-19S:l7:28«Jl91lfiRTESIflN ft CRftNE COPES RTP -iw; NO.974 P.2 — 

P.2 

From: 

Date: 

Contact: 

A 945 2 . 

W-£Jf\ 

Contact Report 

Robert Jemison, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) 

August 6,1998 

Mr. Richard Martins 

Company: CR/PL Limited Partneiship (Crane Plumbing) 

Telephone Number: (419) 521-3282 

Fax Number: (419) 524-0501 

Contact Summary: 

Mr. Richard Matthis was contacted on behalf of the U.S. EPA to update information provided 

in the 1993 EPA Reinforced Plastic Composites Screening Survey submitted by CR/PL Limited 

Partnership for their facility located in Mansfield, Ohio. In response to my questions Mr. Matthis 

indicated tiie following: 

The facility uses atomized spray lay-up to apply clear and pigmented production gel coats 

in the fabrication of the facility's products. The amount of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) present 

in each gel coat is shown in the table below. 

Type of 

Gel Coat 

Production 

Production 

Production 

Color of 

Gel Coat 

Clear 

White 

Beige 

HAP 

Content 

(%bywu 

49.83% 

36.64% 

36.96% 

Styrene 

Content 

(%bywO 

49.83% 

31.74% 

32.86% 

MMA 

Content 

(% bv wt/i 

0.00% 

4.90% 

4.10% 

No additional HAP is added to these gel coats during or prior to the fabrication process with 

the exception of small amounts of HAP that may (or may not) be present in initiators, promoters 

and/or catalysts added to the gel coats. 

CR/PL Limited Partnership has recently acquired (purchased) Universal-Rundle Corporation. 

Note: The total amount of HAP present in a gel coat is the sum of tiie amount of styrene and methyl 

methacrylate (MMA) present in the gel coat. 

INFORMATION IS ACCURATE £^[/Y^^ ¥°/98 
. P.3 

RUG.10.1998 7:28AM ARTESIAN ft CRANE CO NO.974 P.1 ! 

_ 

CRANE 

PLUMBING 

CR/PL, LP. /j 

41 Cairns Road Page 1 of __h_ 

Mansfield, Ohio 44903 

Tel 419/522-4211 

Fax 419/524-0501 

Fax 419 / 521-3350 SPECIAL ORDERS ONLY 

Fax 419 / 525-3169 CUSTOMER SERVICE ONLY 

Date: 6H0-°I2> 

Company: V L o 

Attention^_?__Rr jEMjfOr O 

Fax No.: 

From:\_S7_Y\r\7(\l£S 

Subject: Co^TAcT r\E?b^T 

1~
#### § 107.150 Variable mode and variable configuration of small unmanned aircraft systems.

A small unmanned aircraft system may be eligible for one or more categories of operation over human beings under this subpart, as long as a remote pilot in command cannot inadvertently switch between modes or configurations.
##### 



EXHIBIT 23.1 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM We have issued our report dated June 1, 2005,
except for Note 14 as to which the date is June 15, 2005, accompanying the consolidated financial
statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of MTI Technology Corporation and
subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended April 2, 2005. We hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference of said report in the Registration Statements of MTI Technology Corporation on Forms
S-8 (Nos. 333-109060, 333-103065, 333-85410, 333-76972, 333-69030, 333-66716, 333-95915, 333-92623,
333-85579, 333-61957, 333-46363, 333-50377, 333-18501, 33-75180 and 33-80438) and Form S-3 (No.
333-85410). /S/ GRANT THORNTON LLP Irvine, California
July 13, 2005 66
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Thomas G. Mair, President and Chief Executive Officer of Golden Star Resources Ltd., certify, to the
best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 of Golden Star Resources Ltd. that:

(1) The Annual Report on Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained and incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Golden Star Resources Ltd.



|                                                                      
|----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                      
|/s/ Thomas G. Mair                                                    
|Thomas G. Mair President
and Chief Executive Officer February 24, 2010
Exhibit 31.1


                     Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification
                     --------------------------------------

I, Arnie Geller, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PREMIER EXHIBITIONS,
INC.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I am responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
         disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
         supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
         registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
         us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
         which this report is being prepared;

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
         and procedures presented in this report our conclusions about the
         effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
         of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

         c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
         control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
         most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in
         the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
         reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal
         control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

         a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
         or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
         reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
         record, process, summarize and report financial information; and


<PAGE>

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
         other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
         internal controls.

Date: October 5, 2005

/s/ Arnie Geller
----------------
Arnie Geller,
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
#### KNIGHT v. VINCENT.

Liability of a justice — issuing execution without orders — -demand—pleading—certainty—** suing out process — justice not the agent of the plaintiff.

A justice is not required to issue execution after the stay of execution has expired,* without a demand of the person entitled to it.

An oral demand of execution of a justice out of his office though within h-is township*, will not subject him to suit, if he neglect.

An averment that a demand was made by the plaintiff or his attorney, on or about the 1st of October, in tire township, does not attain to certainty to a common intent, and is bad.

Error to the Court of Common Pleas. Vincent is a justice of the peace, Knight had a judgment on his docket, upon which the defendant gave bail for stay of execution. After the stay had expired, the plaintiff neglected to demand execution, the justice did not issue, and the defendant became insolvent. Knight then sued Vincent for neglect of duty in not issuing execution, and Vincent had judgment. The two following points are now made for the affirmance of the Court, in order to reverse the judgment of the Common Pleas:

1. Is a justice- required to issue execution after the stay has expired, without an order of the plaintiff or his agents?

2. Is an averment in- the- declaration- that an execution was requested of the justice *by the plaintiff or*7ms- agent, *on or about the 1st of October in his township ^*sufficient.

Wright, J-.

The statute makes it the duty of the justice after judgment, to issue execution, unless otherwise directed, if the defendant shall fail to pay or give bond for a stay of execution: (29 *O.L.*181.) The law does not require this of the justice after bail is' given, for stay of execution, nor can we suppose it intended by the legislature to make the judge the general agent of whatever parties have judgment before him. If the party entitled to would obtain process, he must sue for it, or demand it of the officer authorized to issue, and if he refuse, he may be liable.

*749The averment of the demand has no certainty. Whether the request was made by the plaintiff, or his agent, or by what agent, or when, or where, are all uncertain. The party making the averment is supposed to know the matters set forth and to aver them with certainty to a common intent. He has not done so. A request of an execution of a justice, when not at his office, though in the township, unless in writing, would not subject the justice to suit for neglect.

Judgment affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. ER00-1026-001]

Take notice that on March 27, 2000, Indianapolis Power & Light Company (IPL) tendered for filing its compliance filing in the above-referenced docket.

Copies of this filing were served on the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission and others as provided on the official service list.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and protests should be filed on or before May 1, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-10465  Filed 4-26-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3486

To create 4 new permanent judgeships for the eastern district of California. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 12, 2003

Mr. THOMAS (for himself, Mr. NUNES, Mr. DOOLEY of California, Mr. 

RADANOVICH, Mr. CARDOZA, Mr. MATSUI, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. OSE, 

and Mr. HERGER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To create 4 new permanent judgeships for the eastern 

district of California.

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

3 SECTION 1. NEW JUDGESHIPS FOR EASTERN DISTRICT OF 

4 CALIFORNIA. 

5 (a) NEW APPOINTMENTS.—The President shall ap6 point, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, 

7 3 additional district judges for the eastern district of Cali8 fornia. 

9 (b) CONVERSION OF TEMPORARY JUDGESHIP.—The 

10 existing judgeship for the eastern district of California au-
2

•HR 3486 IH 

1 thorized by section 203(c) of the Judicial Improvements 

2 Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–650; 28 U.S.C. 133 note), 

3 as in effect on the day before the date of the enactment 

4 of this Act, shall be a district judgeship for the eastern 

5 district of California, and the incumbent of such judgeship 

6 shall hold office under section 133 of title 28, United 

7 States Code, as amended by subsection (c) of this section. 

8 (c) TABLE.—In order that the table contained in sec9 tion 133(a) of title 28, United States Code, reflects the 

10 total number of permanent district judgeships authorized 

11 by virtue of subsections (a) and (b) of this section, such 

12 table is amended by striking the item relating to California 

13 and inserting the following:

‘‘California: 

Northern ........................................................................................... 14

Eastern ............................................................................................. 10

Central .............................................................................................. 27

Southern ............................................................................................ 13.’’.

14 (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

15 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 

16 necessary to carry out this section, including such sums 

17 as may be necessary to provide appropriate space and fa18 cilities for the judicial positions created by this section.

Æ
1

 Although Lacasidon attempted to file the application earlier, we could not

accept it for filing at that time because he failed to include the requisite filing fee or

a pauper’s affidavit as required by OCGA § 5-6-4 and Court of Appeals Rule 31 (d).

Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,__________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A14D0422. HUGO LACASIDON v. THE STATE.

In 1989, Hugo Lacasidon pled guilty to rape, two counts of aggravated assault,

armed robbery, burglary, aggravated sodomy, and two counts of kidnapping. Years

later, he filed a pro se “Motion to Correct Transcript.” The trial court denied this

motion on April 30, 2014, and Lacasidon filed this application for discretionary

appeal on June 19, 2014.1 We lack jurisdiction.

An application for discretionary appeal must be filed within 30 days of the

entry of the order or judgment to be appealed. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (d). A party’s

failure to meet this statutory deadline deprives us of jurisdiction to consider the

application. See Boyle v. State of Ga., 190 Ga. App. 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989).

Because Lacasidon filed his application 50 days after entry of the order he seeks to

appeal, we lack jurisdiction to consider his application. Accordingly, this application

is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,__________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

07/15/2014

July 15, 2014
+

+

+

o

o

o