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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1033

AMINATA BUBU KAMARA,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General of the

United States,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A70-679-571)

Submitted: August 31, 2006 Decided: September 25, 2006

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Randall L. Johnson, JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Arlington,

Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney

General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Lindsay L.

Chichester, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Aminata Bubu Kamara, a native and citizen of Sierra

Leone, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals (Board) denying as untimely and numerically barred her

motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have reviewed the

record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse

its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R.

§ 1003.2(a), (c) (2006). Accordingly, we deny the petition for

review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Kamara, No.

A70-679-571 (B.I.A. Dec. 8, 2005). 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.

PETITION DENIED
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Matthew Ryan Blain

, * From the 238th District

Court of Midland County,

Trial Court No. CR38072

.

Vs. No. 11

- 12

- 00212

- CR * August 8, 2013

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Willson, J

. (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Willson , J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is

no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s

opinion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
#### INDUST COMM v GARDINIO

Ohio Supreme Court

No. 21086.

Decided Jan. 16, 1929.

MATTHIAS, J

EMPLOYER & EMPLOYE

(250 W3) The Ohio Workmen’s compensation fund is not available to an employee injured while engaged in the performance of a contract to do specified work in another state, no part whereof is to be performed in Ohio.

Marshall, C J, Robinson, Jones, Day and Allen, JJ, concur. Kinkade, J, not participating.
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 Allstates  WorldCargo,
Inc.  (the  "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending December  31,
2004  as  filed  with  the  Securities and  Exchange  Commission  (the
"Report"), I, Sam DiGiralomo, Chief Executive Officer of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant  to  18 U.S.C. ss. 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)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Dated: February 14, 2005

/s/ Sam DiGiralomo
President and Chief Executive Officer


This  certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section  906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
§ 1404.16 Reports and biographical sketches. ( a ) Arbitrators listed on the Roster shall execute and return all documents, forms and reports required by OA and be responsible for updating their account and bio information online, including changes of address, telephone number, and availability. They must also furnish to OA the contact information for a person they know well whom OA may contact if unable to reach the arbitrator, and who has agreed to contact OA if the arbitrator has become incapacitated or deceased. Arbitrators must contact OA directly when they engage, or are accused of engaging, in any business or other connection or relationship involving labor or employment relations and/or which creates or gives the appearance of advocacy as defined in § 1404.5(c)(1).
( b ) OA reserves the right to decide and approve the format and content of biographical sketches.
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 483 

AN ACT 

To enact into law a bill by reference. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 483 ES

1 SECTION 1. (a) H.R. 1029 of the 115th Congress, 

2 as passed by the Senate on June 28, 2018, is enacted into 

3 law. 

4 (b) In publishing this Act in slip form and in the 

5 United States Statutes at Large pursuant to section 112 

6 of title 1, United States Code, the Archivist of the United 

7 States shall include after the date of approval at the end 

8 an appendix setting forth the text of the bill referred to 

9 in subsection (a). 

Passed the Senate February 14, 2019. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 483 

AN ACT 

To enact into law a bill by reference.
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

I Michael J. Wallace, the Chief Financial Officer of Intrepid Capital
Corporation (the Company), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to my knowledge:



|1. |  | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period
ended March 31, 2003 (the Periodic Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and
|-- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  
|2. |  | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.                                                               

|                    |  |                                                                  
|------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 20, 2003 |  |                                                                  
|                   
|                    |  |                                                                  
|                   
|                    |  | /s/ Michael J. WallaceMichael J. Wallace, Chief Financial Officer

A Signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Intrepid Capital Corporation and will be retained by Intrepid
Capital Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wells Real Estate Fund XII, L.P. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report),
the undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Chief Executive Officer of the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners of the Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the corporate general partner of one of the
General Partners of the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:



| | (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 Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |                        
| |  | -----------------------
| |  | /s/ LEO F. WELLS, III  
| |  | Leo F. Wells, III      
| |  | Chief Executive Officer
| |  | May 13, 2009           



| |  |                        
| |  | -----------------------
| |  | /s/ DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS
| |  | Douglas P. Williams    
| |  | Chief Financial Officer
| |  | May 13, 2009
#### § 93.130 Suspension of allocations.

The Administrator may suspend the effectiveness of any allocation prescribed in § 93.123 and the reservation requirements prescribed in § 93.125 if he finds such action to be consistent with the efficient use of the airspace. Such suspension may be terminated whenever the Administrator determines that such action is necessary for the efficient use of the airspace.

[Doc. No. 9974, 35 FR 16592, Oct. 24, 1970, as amended by Amdt. 93-21, 35 FR 16636, Oct. 27, 1970; Amdt. 93-27, 38 FR 29464, Oct. 25, 1973]
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

         In connection with the Annual Report of River Holding Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the quarter ended December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Periodic
Report"), I, Charles A. French, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, to my knowledge, that:

     7.   The Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
          13(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

     8.   The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in
          all material respects, the financial condition and results of
          operations of the Company.



                                        /s/ CHARLES A. FRENCH
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Charles A. French
                                        President and Chief Financial Officer
                                        March 24, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          24,867
<SECURITIES>                                 4,705,490
<RECEIVABLES>                                  271,311
<ALLOWANCES>                                    19,773
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,981,895
<PP&E>                                         979,248
<DEPRECIATION>                                 243,266
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,460,382
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          440,073
<BONDS>                                        382,650
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,682,162
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,044,503
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,460,382
<SALES>                                          9,279
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,572,232
<CGS>                                           15,126
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  305,329
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                28,415
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             237,931
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                242,564
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            242,564
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   242,564
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12


</TABLE>
§ 29.173 Static longitudinal stability. ( a ) The longitudinal control must be designed so that a rearward movement of the control is necessary to obtain an airspeed less than the trim speed, and a forward movement of the control is necessary to obtain an airspeed more than the trim speed.
( b ) Throughout the full range of altitude for which certification is requested, with the throttle and collective pitch held constant during the maneuvers specified in § 29.175(a) through (d), the slope of the control position versus airspeed curve must be positive. However, in limited flight conditions or modes of operation determined by the Administrator to be acceptable, the slope of the control position versus airspeed curve may be neutral or negative if the rotorcraft possesses flight characteristics that allow the pilot to maintain airspeed within ±5 knots of the desired trim airspeed without exceptional piloting skill or alertness.
[Amdt. 29-24, 49 FR 44436, Nov. 6, 1984, as amended by Amdt. 29-51, 73 FR 11001, Feb. 29, 2008]
§ 450.149 Safety-critical personnel qualifications. ( a ) *General.* An operator must ensure safety-critical personnel are trained, qualified, and capable of performing their safety-critical tasks, and that their training is current.
( b ) *Application requirements.* An applicant must— ( 1 ) Identify safety-critical tasks that require qualified personnel;
( 2 ) Provide internal training and currency requirements, completion standards, or any other means of demonstrating compliance with the requirements of this section; and
( 3 ) Describe the process for tracking training currency.
(see attached scope of accreditation for fields of testing and accredited test methods )

Print Date: 12/09/2011 Page 1 of 2 This is to signify that



## ADVANCED TESTING SER VICES

610 SOUTH SECOND STREET

SPRINGFIELD, OREGON 97477

Testing Laboratory TL

- 372

has met the requirements of the IAS Accreditation Criteria for Testing Laboratories (AC89), has demonstrated compliance with

A NS/ISO/IEC Standard 17025:2005, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories , and has

been accredited, commencing May 4, 2011, for the test methods listed in the approved scope of accreditation.

Patrick V. McCull en C. P. Ramani, P.E.

Vice President PresidentAdvanced Testing Services TL

- 3 7 2

May 4, 2011

Commencement Date C. P. Ramani, P.E.

President

Print Date: 12/09/2011 Page 2 of 2 Advanced Testing Services Curtis Shields

610 S. Second St

. ATS Quality Manager

Springfield, OR 97477 (541) 744

- 3649

FIELDS OF TESTING ACCREDITED TEST METHODS

Formaldehyde testing ASTM Standards D 5197, D 6007 and E 1333
§ 1440.1 Arbitration of pesticide data disputes. ( a ) Persons requesting the appointment of an arbitrator under section 3(c)(1)(D)(ii) and section 3(c)(2)(B)(iii) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136, as amended), shall send such requests in writing to the appropriate American Arbitration Association Regional Office. Such requests must include the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the parties to the dispute; issue(s) in dispute, the amount in dollars or any other remedy sought; sufficient facts to show that the statutory waiting period has passed, and the appropriate fee provided in the Fee Schedule.
( b ) For the purpose of compliance with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (hereinafter “the Act”), the roster of arbitrators maintained by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service shall be the roster of commercial arbitrators maintained by the American Arbitration Association. Under this Act, arbitrators will be appointed from that roster. The fees of the American Arbitration Association shall apply, and the procedure and rules of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, applicable to arbitration proceedings under the Act, shall be the FIFRA arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association, which are hereby made a part of this regulation.
§ 77.23 Heliport imaginary surfaces. ( a ) *Primary surface.* The area of the primary surface coincides in size and shape with the designated take-off and landing area. This surface is a horizontal plane at the elevation of the established heliport elevation.
( b ) *Approach surface.* The approach surface begins at each end of the heliport primary surface with the same width as the primary surface, and extends outward and upward for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet where its width is 500 feet. The slope of the approach surface is 8 to 1 for civil heliports and 10 to 1 for military heliports.
( c ) *Transitional surfaces.* These surfaces extend outward and upward from the lateral boundaries of the primary surface and from the approach surfaces at a slope of 2 to 1 for a distance of 250 feet measured horizontally from the centerline of the primary and approach surfaces.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31159]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12227]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. RP88-68-042 and IN89-1-003]


Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Filing

May 10, 2000.
    Take notice that on April 27, 2000, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line 
Corporation (Transco) submitted a filing seeking a clarification of a 
May 29, 1991 Stipulation and Consent Agreement (Agreement) between the 
Enforcement section of the Office of the General Counsel and Transco. 
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, 55 FERC para.61,318 (1991). 
Specifically, Transco asks clarification that employees of Transco's 
marketing affiliate, Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Company, who 
are not involved in natural gas related transactions may have offices 
in the same building in which Transco is headquartered.
    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 25, 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. 00-12227 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Howe *vs.*Goodrich.

Where a suit is brought in this court upon a bond, the *penalty*whereof exceeds $350, but the *amount due is less than*$50, the plaintiffis not entitled to costs, provided the defendant, previous to the obtaining of judgment against him on the bond, tenders the amount'due ; and on showing such tender, an order for a perpetual stay of proceedings will be granted.

This was a motion for a perpetual stay of proceedings. The plaintiff declared upon an arbitration bond in the penalty of $500, stating an award for $13.72. The defendant’s attorney offered to pay the $13.72 and common pleas costs, but the plaintiff’s attorney claimed supreme court costs. The defendant now moves that the clerk compute the amount due to the plaintiff, and that on payment of that sum into court, all further proceedings stay perpetually.

*By the Court.*

[561] By the Revised Statutes, (2 *R. S.*616, § 21,) it is enacted that “where any suit upon any contract, except against executors and administrators, is settled before judgment, and the sum actually due and- admitted does not exceed the sum which upon a recovery would entitle the plaintiff to costs, no costs shall be demanded or received; if the sum so due exceeds $50, and does not exceed $250, no other or greater costs shall be demanded or received, than if such suit had been brought in a court of common pleas.” In *Wells*v. *Feeter,*(5 *Wendell,*133,) it was decided that the true construction of this section is this: that if less than $50 is admitted to be due, no costs shall be received upon settlement, although the plaintiff might recover costs upon obtaining a judgment, as upon the penalty of a bond; it was also-determined that a tender of the amount, due is a settlement of the suit within the meaning of the statute. This case comes precisely within that decision, and strongly exemplifies the justice of such a legislative provision. The plaintiff admits that only $13.72 are due to him; but because the penalty.of his bond is $500, he seeks to compel the defendant to pay supreme court costs, when Hie ought to .have prosecuted before a justice. According to our statutes and our forms of entering judgment, he would have accomplished his object, but for the section above quoted. The-judgment must necessarily have been for $500; and the condition being for the performance of an award, and the defendant being unable to reduce the amount of $13.72- by a set-off¡ the defendant must necessarily have paid supreme court costs. The case of *Lewis*v. *Spencer,*(12 *Wendell,*140,) contains nothing at variance with this doctrine, but confirms it. There the plaintiff had recovered judgment on the penalty, and it was held he was entitled to costs. So he would in this case, if he had proceeded to judgment. But if, in that case, a motion had been made in the Madison common pleas, founded upon a tender before judgment of the amount actually due, which was $42.75, a perpetual stay would have been ordered, as it was in *Wells*v. *Feeter.*Motion granted, with costs.
§ 16.106 Standards for awards. ( a ) A prevailing applicant may receive an award for fees and expenses incurred in connection with a proceeding, or in a significant and discrete substantive portion of the proceeding, unless the position of the Department as a party over which the applicant has prevailed was substantially justified or if special circumstances make the award sought unjust. No presumption arises that the Department's position was not substantially justified simply because the Department did not prevail.
( b ) An award will be reduced or denied if the applicant has unduly or unreasonably protracted the proceeding.