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

###### National Transportation Safety Board

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rhonda Underwood (202) 314-6065.

Dated: May 5, 2000.

Rhonda Underwood,

Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-11707 Filed 5-5-00; 2:42 pm]

BILLING CODE 7533-01-M
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

In re: )

)

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND )

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, ) PROMESA

as representative of ) Title III

)

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO )

et al., ) Case No. 3:17-03283

Debtors1 ) (LTS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------)

In re: )

)

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND ) PROMESA

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, ) Title III

as representative of )

) Case No. 3:17-03566 

THE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ) (LTS)

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE )

COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, )

)

Debtor )

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

 

1 The Debtors in this Title III case are: (i) The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 

(Bankr. Case No. 17-bk-3283-LTS); (ii) The Employees Retirement System of the Govt. of 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Bankr. Case No. 17-bk-3566-LTS); (iii) Puerto Rico 

Sales Tax Financing Corporation (Bankr. Case No. 17-bk-3284-LTS); (iv) Puerto Rico 

Highways and Transportation Authority (Bankr.Case No. 17-bk-3567-LTS); and (v) 

Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (Bankr. Case No. 17-bk-4780-LTS). 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4041 Filed:10/10/18 Entered:10/10/18 14:16:42 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
Certificate of Service 2

 Comes Now, secured creditor Cooperativa de Ahorro y Crédito Vegabajeña

("Cooperativa"), represented by its undersigned attorneys and respectfully states, alleges

and prays:

Appearing counsel hereby certifies that, pursuant to Section II.D and II.I of the 

Sixth Amended Notice, Case Management and Administrative Procedures (ECF 3804-1), the 

Motion for Lift of Stay filed by Cooperativa with the Clerk of the Court using the 

CM/ECF system, notification of such filing was sent to all CM/ECF participants who

have filed a notice of appearance and are registered in the CM/ECF system: Hermann 

Bauer, Esq., Hermann.Bauer@oneillborges.com; Ubaldo M. Fernandez Barrera, Esq., 

ubaldo.fernandez@oneillborges.com; counsel to The Financial Oversight & Management 

Board For Puerto Rico; Diana M. Perez, Esq, dperez@omm.com; Luis C. Marini Biaggi, 

Esq., lmarini@mpmlawpr.com; Carolina Veraz-Rivero, Esq., cvelaz@mpmlawpr.com; 

counsel to the Puerto Rico Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory Authority; and by USPS 

to the U.S. Trustee.

In San Juan, P.R, this 10th day October, 2018.

 /s/ Carlos A. Quilichini Paz

USDCPR 120906

Jessica M. Quilichini Ortíz

USDCPR 223803

Attorneys for Cooperativa de

Ahorro y Crédito Vegabajeña

Post Office Box 9020895

San Juan, Puerto Rico 00902-0895

Telephone: (787) 729-1720

Facsimile: (787) 724-6000

Email: quilichinipazc@microjuris.com

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4041 Filed:10/10/18 Entered:10/10/18 14:16:42 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
§ 413.21 Denial of a license application. ( a ) The FAA informs an applicant, in writing, if it denies an application and states the reasons for denial.
( b ) If the FAA has denied an application in its entirety, the applicant may either— ( 1 ) Attempt to correct any deficiencies identified and ask the FAA to reconsider the revised application, in which case the FAA has 60 days or the number of days remaining in the review period, whichever is greater, within which to reconsider the decision; or
( 2 ) Request a hearing in accordance with part 406 of this chapter, for the purpose of showing why the application should not be denied.
( c ) An applicant whose application is denied after reconsideration under paragraph (b)(1) of this section may request a hearing in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
[Amdt. 413-03, 64 FR 19614, Apr. 21, 1999, as amended by Amdt. 413-9, 72 FR 17019, Apr. 6, 2007; Doc. No. FAA-2019-0229, Amdt. 413-12, 85 FR 79711, Dec. 10, 2020]
STOLEN PROPERTY.

[Hamilton Circuit Court,

1899.]

King, Haynes and Parker, JJ., Sixth Circuit, holding Court.

#### Lavina Price v. John C. Schwartz.

Title to a Stolen Bank Bill may be Conveyed by Receiver oe it,

The title to a stolen bank bill received in good faith for a valuable consideration in the usual course of business vests in the person receiving it, and it may be lawfully conveyed by him, so that the purchaser will be entitled to retain its possession, as against the owner from whom it was stolen.

Heard on Error.

A stolen one hundred dollar bill was used by the thief in payment to the Pennsylvania Railway Company of a freight bill of four dollars, the remaining ninety-six dollars being handed back to the thief in change. The stolen bill was traced to the railway company and identified by its number; thereafter it was placed by the company temporarily in the hands of the police for the purpose of prosecuting the thief, and by the police was passed on.to the prosecuting attorney. The trial being delayed, the city gave the railway company one hundred dollars in *439currency in exchange for the bill, and subsequently the owner of the bill replevined it from the prosecuting attorney. Squire Kushman held in the replevin suit that title to the bill passed to the railway company, fro'm whom the city in turn derived a good title. This holding was affirmed in the common pleas.

*C. S. Sparks,*for plaintiff in error. •

*Frank M. Coppock,*for the city.

Haynes, J.

The law seems to be settled that one who takes in good faith and for a valuable consideration in the usual course of business a bank bill, takes also a good title to the same although the same has been stolen, and although the same in fact is received from the thief himself.

Nor in our opinion does sec. 1914, Rev. Stat., affect the title of such purchaser or operate to deprive him of his property.

It follows that the railroad company having taken the bill in question in the manner above stated had a good title to the same which it lawfully conveyed to the city of Cincinnati, who was at the time of commencement of this suit the owner of and entitled to the possession of the same.

The judgment of the court of common pleas was, therefore, correct, and the same is hereby 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 Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

# ACTION:

Notice; correction. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The Bureau of Land Management published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         of April 20, 2000, concerning designations for Off Highway Vehicle use on public lands. The document contained an incorrect road name and number.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Jaynes, 406-896-5013. 

## Correction 

                        In the                         **Federal Register**                         of April 20, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 77) on page 21209, correct the sentence in “Summary” from “Bear Canyon Ridge Road [1031] from East Horsehaven [1030] T.9S., R.26E., Section 2, meandering north to the Custer National Forest in Section 2” to read “Bear Canyon Ridge Road [1031] from West Horsehaven [1021] T.9S., R.26E., meandering north to the Custer National Forest in Section 2”.                     

Dated: May 1, 2000.

Sandra S. Brooks, 

Field Manager. 

[FR Doc. 00-11235 Filed 5-4-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P
§ 3.205 Effect of Transportation Security Administration notification on applications by individuals for a certificate or any part of a certificate. ( a ) When the TSA notifies the FAA that an individual who has applied for a certificate or any part of a certificate issued by the FAA poses, or is suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety, the FAA will hold the individual's certificate applications in abeyance pending further notification from the TSA.
( b ) When the TSA notifies the FAA that the TSA has made a final security threat determination regarding an individual, the FAA will deny all the individual's certificate applications. Alternatively, if the TSA notifies the FAA that it has withdrawn its security threat determination, the FAA will continue processing the individual's applications.
#### § 61.91 [Reserved]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1319

PAUL VERNON SMITH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

HOUCHENS INDUSTRIES, d/b/a Save-A-Lot,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge.

(6:06-cv-03405-HFF)

Submitted: July 27, 2007 Decided: August 15, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Paul Vernon Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Wade Edward Ballard, FORD &

HARRISON, LLP, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Paul Vernon Smith seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s

report and recommendation. This court may exercise jurisdiction

only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain

interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.

R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S.

541 (1949). The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation Smith

seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable

interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### § 437.13 Additional experimental permit terms and conditions.

The FAA may modify an experimental permit at any time by modifying or adding permit terms and conditions to ensure compliance with 51 U.S.C. Subtitle V, chapter 509.

[Doc. No. FAA-2012-0232, 77 FR 20533, Apr. 5, 2012]
#### FISHER v. KEEN, Dist. Judge.

No. 29725.

March 26, 1940.

*100 P. 2d 859.*

*6Darnell & Gibson, of Clinton, for plaintiff.

DANNER, J.

This is an original action in mandamus by Hazel B. Fisher against W. P. Keen, district judge of the twelfth judicial district of the state of Oklahoma, to compel the respondent to enter an order confirming sale of real estate and to direct the sheriff of Custer county to execute a deed to the plaintiff.

On the 29th of October, 1927, Hazel B. Fisher filed an action in the district court of Custer county, Okla., against L. E. Coleman and Katherine M. Coleman et al. for the foreclosure of real estate mortgages. Service of summons was had, and in due time judgment was taken, and same became final.

Pursuant to praecipe an execution and an order of sale were issued by the court clerk of Custer county. The property was advertised and sold by the sheriff without appraisement, appraisement having been waived and more than six months having elapsed from the time the judgment was rendered. At the shériff’s sale, the plaintiff became the purchaser of the property, bidding an amount less than the judgment. The sheriff made his return of the sale, and the plaintiff filed her motion to confirm it. There were no objections filed to the regularity of. the sale.

The court examined the proceedings of the sheriff under the order of sale and execution, and made a finding that same had been performed in all respects in conformity to law, but refused to confirm the sale unless the deficiency judgment be released. We held in State ex rel. Commissioners of Land Office v. District Court of Custer County, 185 Okla. 597, 95 P. 2d 851, in a similar state of facts, that the refusal of the court to confirm the sale was purely arbitrary and that mandamus would lie to compel the confirmation. See that decision, which is adopted as the law of this case.

The writ is granted, and respondent is directed to confirm the sale and cause execution of a deed conveying to Hazel B. Fisher the property foreclosed. It is further ordered that the costs of this proceeding be taxed to the respondent.

BAYLESS, C. J., WELCH, V. C. J., and CORN and HURST, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of aQuantive, Inc. (the “***Company***”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “***Form 10-Q***”), I, Brian P. McAndrews, the Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adoptedpursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

 

(1) The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and 

 

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany. 

 

Dated: November 13, 2003
#### STATE OF FLORIDA v CASTLE, et al.

Case No. CF91-1331A1-XX (Consolidated)

Tenth Judicial Circuit, Polk County

October 11, 1991

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Office of the State Attorney, for plaintiff.

Francis A. Solorzano, Assistant Public Defender, for defendants.

OPINION OF THE COURT

E. RANDOLPH BENTLEY, Circuit Judge.

OlIVER L. GREEN, Circuit Judge.

WILLIAM A. NORRIS, Circuit Judge.

ROBERT E. PYLE, Circuit Judge.

SUSAN V. ROBERTS, Administrative Judge.

THE DEFENDANTS seek a dismissal of the charges made against them of Sell, Purchase, Manufacture, Delivery and Possession of Cocaine with the intent to sell within 200 feet of a public housing *211facility; in violation of Florida Statute 893.13(l)(i) (1990 Supp.) and assert that a person of reasonable, ordinary intelligence cannot understand what the legislature intends the phrase “public housing facility” to encompass.

THE DEFENDANTS suggest several possible definitions of that language including federally subsidized low income housing projects, state subsidized housing projects, municipally subsidized housing projects all with various income restrictions, sizes of dwelling units and other requirements of the various Federal programs. Some for instance, subsidize home purchases for Farmers, and some like Gennie Mae, HUD, FHA, and Freddie Mac are mortgage programs.

THE DEFENSE further asserts that the phrase “public housing facility” is not defined in any dictionary or any case law or related statutory provisions.

THE STATE asserts that the phrase “public housing facility” must be given its plain, ordinary meaning in ridding the State of “a cesspool of drugs and violence”.

THE COURT finds that § 421.03(9), Florida Statutes (1990) defines housing projects as any real or personal property set aside or acquired for the public purpose of providing low cost housing for low income individuals, parks, recreation, community services such as roads, sewers, dwellings, apartments, site preparation, gardens, administrative or educational facilities. It is also defined as planning states of any construction project through construction use or demolition of the facilities. Those projects are funded with state, (.federal or municipal monies.

THE COURT finds that the definition of “public housing facilities” may be found in § 421.03(9), Florida Statutes (1990) and that it is not one that a person of reasonable or ordinary intelligence can readily ascertain. See *Bertens v Stewart,*453 So.2d 92, 93 (2d DCA 1984).

THE MOTION to Dismiss is hereby GRANTED and Florida Statute 893.13(l)(i) (1990 Supp.) is hereby declared unconstitutional.

DONE AND ORDERED this the 11th day of October, 1991.
Exhibit 32.2



Written Statement of the Controller



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350



Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, the undersigned Controller of Americas Power Partners, Inc. (the Company)
hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report of Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report presents fairly, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                   
|-------------------
|/s/ Jerome P. Frett
|Jerome P. Frett    
|October 29, 2004   





20
#### § 385.32 Effective date of staff action.

Unless, within the time provided by or pursuant to this part, a petition for review is filed or the Department gives notice that it will review on its own motion, staff action shall, without further proceedings, be effective and become the action of the Department upon the expiration of such period. A timely petition for review filed in accordance with the provisions of this section, or notice given by the Department of review on its own motion, shall stay the staff action pending disposition by the Department, unless the Department determines otherwise or unless the staff action provides otherwise in accordance with subpart A of this part. However, in cases where the Department's regulations provide that permissions or approvals are granted, or that other legal effects result, within a stated period from the filing with the Department of a prescribed document, unless the Department gives notice to the contrary or takes other action within said period, such notice given or action taken by a staff member under delegated authority shall toll the running of such period. A timely petition for review of staff action which is not stayed by its filing which is received after or not acted upon before the effective date of the action shall be entertained and disposed of on its merits as a petition for reconsideration.

[Doc. No. T-1, 49 FR 50985, Dec. 31, 1984. Redesignated by Doc. No. OST-96-1268, 61 FR 19171, May 1, 1996. Amended by Doc. No. DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15945, Apr. 16, 2019]
§ 29.727 Reserve energy absorption drop test. The reserve energy absorption drop test must be conducted as follows: ( a ) The drop height must be 1.5 times that specified in § 29.725(a).
( b ) Rotor lift, where considered in a manner similar to that prescribed in § 29.725(b), may not exceed 1.5 times the lift allowed under that paragraph.
( c ) The landing gear must withstand this test without collapsing. Collapse of the landing gear occurs when a member of the nose, tail, or main gear will not support the rotorcraft in the proper attitude or allows the rotorcraft structure, other than landing gear and external accessories, to impact the landing surface.
[Doc. No. 5084, 29 FR 16150, Dec. 3, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 27-26, 55 FR 8003, Mar. 6, 1990]
PUBLIC LAW 113–112—JUNE 9, 2014 128 STAT. 1173 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1451 (S. 668): 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 160 (2014): 

Mar. 24, considered and passed House. 

May 21, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 113–112 

113th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 14 Main 

Street in Brockport, New York, as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Nicholas J. Reid Post 

Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT NICHOLAS J. REID POST OFFICE 

BUILDING. 

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

Service located at 14 Main Street in Brockport, New York, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Nicholas J. Reid 

Post Office Building’’. 

(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 ‘‘Staff Sergeant Nicholas J. Reid Post Office Building’’. 

Approved June 9, 2014. 

June 9, 2014 

[H.R. 1451] 


kgrant on DSKB33CYQ1 with PUBLAW
EXHIBIT 32

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of National Lampoon, Inc and
Subsidiaries (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 31, 2004
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and to which this
Certification is an exhibit (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to our
knowledge:

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

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


Date: December 20, 2004                   /s/ James P. Jimirro
                                          -------------------------------
                                          James P. Jimirro,
                                          Chief Executive Officer


                                          /s/ James Toll
                                          -------------------------------
                                          James Toll,
                                          Chief Financial Officer