alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 42.7 Complaint/directed action logs. ( a ) To facilitate the Committee's review of all migrant farmworker complaints, including pre and post occupancy housing inspections and the enforcement strategies of DOL agencies, the Committee shall oversee the operation of a system of coordinated Complaint/Directed Action Logs (*logs*). The logs shall be maintained by each DOL agency and appropriate SESA and OSHA State agencies.
( b ) The logs shall record both the numbers of compliance actions initiated as a result of complaints and those initiated on the basis of directed activity. They shall also include a statistical record of all original referrals both from and to other DOL agencies or federal or State authorities. ( 1 ) Whenever a complaint is received and/or an investigation is completed by an agency, the appropriate official of that agency shall enter the matter on the log.
( 2 ) Wherever possible, the responsible agency, upon request, shall inform the complainant of the status of the actions pending, and shall inform, when applicable, the referring agency.
( 3 ) ESA, OSHA, USES, and the Office of the Solicitor shall be responsible for preparing the quarterly statistical summary by regions of the respective agency's compliance activity. This summary shall include all complaints and compliance actions which ( i ) Were pursued to completion by the subagency during the reporting period or
( ii ) Were received during the reporting period or earlier, and are pending. Each agency also shall report a summary of aging and resource allocation data. The summary shall be submitted to the National Committee and the appropriate Regional Committee.
( c ) The National Committee staff shall analyze the statistical summaries and shall recommend National or Regional Committee action where problems or short-comings are identified. Pursuant to this review, the National Committee shall take steps to ensure that the responsible agencies make timely responses to complaints and conduct vigorous enforcement action.
Exhibit 32.2



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 Annual Report of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company, (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Becky Corigliano, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 81 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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company.



/s/ Becky Corigliano



DATE:  March 28, 2005

Becky Corigliano

Chief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Little Squaw Gold Mining Company and will be retained by Little Squaw Gold Mining Company to be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 1978.105 Issuance of findings and preliminary orders. ( a ) After considering all the relevant information collected during the investigation, the Assistant Secretary will issue, within 60 days of the filing of the complaint, written findings as to whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the respondent has retaliated against the complainant in violation of STAA. ( 1 ) If the Assistant Secretary concludes that there is reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred, the Assistant Secretary will accompany the findings with a preliminary order providing relief. Such order will require, where appropriate: affirmative action to abate the violation; reinstatement of the complainant to his or her former position, with the same compensation, terms, conditions and privileges of the complainant's employment; and payment of compensatory damages (backpay with interest and compensation for any special damages sustained as a result of the retaliation, including any litigation costs, expert witness fees, and reasonable attorney fees which the complainant has incurred). Interest on backpay will be calculated using the interest rate applicable to underpayment of taxes under 26 U.S.C. 6621 and will be compounded daily. The preliminary order may also require the respondent to pay punitive damages up to $250,000.
( 2 ) If the Assistant Secretary concludes that a violation has not occurred, the Assistant Secretary will notify the parties of that finding.
( b ) The findings and, where appropriate, the preliminary order will be sent by means that allow OSHA to confirm delivery to all parties of record (and each party's legal counsel if the party is represented by counsel). The findings and, where appropriate, the preliminary order will inform the parties of the right to object to the findings and/or the order and to request a hearing. The findings and, where appropriate, the preliminary order also will give the address of the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Department of Labor, or appropriate information regarding filing objections electronically with the Office of Administrative Law Judges. At the same time, the Assistant Secretary will file with the Chief Administrative Law Judge a copy of the original complaint and a copy of the findings and/or order.
( c ) The findings and the preliminary order will be effective 30 days after receipt by the respondent (or the respondent's legal counsel if the respondent is represented by counsel), or on the compliance date set forth in the preliminary order, whichever is later, unless an objection and request for a hearing have been timely filed as provided at § 1978.106. However, the portion of any preliminary order requiring reinstatement will be effective immediately upon the respondent's receipt of the findings and the preliminary order, regardless of any objections to the findings and/or the order.
[77 FR 44134, July 27, 2012, as amended at 86 FR 1788, Jan. 11, 2021]
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T AN DR E W S UD E S H N AR AY AN , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 11- 72601 A ge nc yN o. A 035- 213- 785 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r19, 2012 ** B efo re: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an dF IS H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A n d r e w Su d e s h N a r a y a n , an a t i v e a n dc i t i z e n o f th e U n i t e dK i n g d o m, p e titio n s f

o rr e v ie w o f

th e B o a r do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ’ o r d e rd is m is s in g h is ap p e a l f r o m a n im m ig r a tio n ju d g e ’s r e m o v a l o r d e rd e n y in g N a r a y a n ’s m o tio n to t e rm i na t e . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. R e vi e w i ng de novo 

# FI LED DE C 21 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 72601 2 q u e s tio n s o f

la w , Morales -G arci a v. H older , 56 7 F . 3d 10 58 , 10 61 (9th C i r. 20 09 ), we d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f

o rr e v i e w. T he agency properl y c on cl ud ed thatN ar ay an’ s c on vi ct i on un der s e c t i o n 2 7 3 . 5 ( a ) o f

th e Ca l i f

o rn i aPe n a l Co d e c o n s t i tu t e s ac o n v i c t i o n f o rac r i me i nvol vi ng m or a l turpi tude ( “ C I M T ” ) be c aus e am odi f i e d c a t e gor i c a l a na l y s i s of the re cord of conv i ct i on es t abl i shes thatN ar ay an w as conv i ct ed of i nfl i ct i ng corporal in ju ryup o n h is s p o u s e . See U ni te d States v . L e al- V

ega , 680 F . 3d 1160, 1168- 69 (9th C i r. 20 12 ) ( ho l di ng thata c ri m i nal com pl ai nt , re ad t og ether w i th o ther j ud i ci al l y not i ce abl e docum ent s, m aybe consi dere d u nd erthe m od i fi ed ca t egori ca l a na l y s i s i f

no a m bi gui tye xi s t s i n the r e c or d of c onvi c t i on t o c onc l ude tha tthe d e f e n d a n t w a s c o n v ic te do f ag e n e r ic f

e d e r a l o f f e n s e ) ; Mo ra les - G a r c ia , 567 F . 3d at10 65 (a ff

i rm i ng thatspou sa l abuse c on st i tut es a C IM T ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 34 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. J. RES. 34

     To provide a replacement laboratory and support space at the 
  Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) Mathias Laboratory.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 22, 2008

   Mr. Leahy (for himself, Mr. Cochran, and Mr. Dodd) introduced the 
 following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the 
                 Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
     To provide a replacement laboratory and support space at the 
  Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) Mathias Laboratory.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SERC MATHIAS LABORATORY.

    The Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution is authorized 
to plan, design, and construct laboratory and support space to 
accommodate the Mathias Laboratory at the Smithsonian Environmental 
Research Center in Edgewater, Maryland.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    There are authorized to be appropriated for the purposes described 
in section 1 $3,500,000 for fiscal year 2009 and a total of $37,500,000 
for all succeeding fiscal years.
                                 <all>
```
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 Nos. ER00-2251-001, ER97-705-012, ER98-2491-007 and ER99-2251-001]

Take notice that on May 5, 2000, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (Con Edison), on behalf of itself and its affiliates Consolidated Edison Solutions, Inc., Consolidated Edison Energy, Inc., and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. submitted an updated market power analysis.

Con Edison states that a copy of the filing was served on the New York Public Service Commission.

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 June 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).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-13228  Filed 5-25-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
-23-

EXHIBIT (11)

<TABLE>

STATEMENT RE:  COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
TRINOVA CORPORATION
(In thousands, except per share data)
<CAPTION>
                                                 Year Ended December 31       
                                          --------------------------------------
                                            1995           1994           1993
                                          --------       --------       --------
<S>                                       <C>            <C>            <C>
Average shares outstanding                   28,867         28,719         28,321   

Assumed conversion of the 6%
 convertible debentures                       1,905          1,905              -

Net effect of dilutive stock options based
 upon treasury stock method using average
 market price                                    92            191             84
                                          ---------      ---------      ---------
Average shares of common stock and
 common stock equivalents outstanding        30,864         30,815         28,405
                                          =========      =========      =========

Income before cumulative
 effect of accounting change              $  94,896      $  65,855      $  10,511

After-tax equivalent of interest
 expense on the 6% convertible
 debentures                                   3,720          3,720              - 

Cumulative effect to January 1, 1993,
 of accounting change, net of income
 tax benefit                                      -              -        (70,229)
                                          ---------      ---------      ---------

Net income (loss) for purposes of
 computing net income (loss) per share    $  98,616      $  69,575      $ (59,718)
                                          =========      =========      =========
Income before cumulative
 effect of accounting change              $    3.20      $    2.26      $     .37

Cumulative effect of accounting
 change, net of income tax benefit                -              -          (2.47) 
                                          ---------      ---------      ---------

NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE               $    3.20      $    2.26      $   (2.10)
                                          =========      =========      =========

<FN>
Note - Net income (loss) per share is computed using the average number of common
shares outstanding, including common stock equivalents.  For purposes of computing
net income per share for 1995 and 1994, the assumed conversion of the Company's 6%
convertible debentures was included in average shares outstanding, increasing the
average number of shares outstanding by 1,904,762 shares, and net income was
increased for the after-tax equivalent of interest expense on the debentures. The
assumed conversion of the 6% convertible debentures was not included in average
shares outstanding for 1993 because the effect of the inclusion would have been
anti-dilutive.

</FN>
</TABLE>
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 on Form 10-Q of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust VI (the "Trust") and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding VI, L.P.
for the period ended September 29, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marlene Debel,
Regular Trustee of the Trust, 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 Trust.





                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST VI


                              By:  /s/ MARLENE DEBEL
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    Marlene Debel *
                              Title:   Regular Trustee









Dated: November 8, 2006
______________________

* Marlene Debel functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
  and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Trust for  purposes  of Section  906
  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
# Exhibit 32     Section 1350
Certifications.

---

# Exhibit 32

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

The undersigned, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of First Capital Bank Holding Corporation (the
Company), each certify that, to his knowledge on the date of this
certification:

| | 1. | The quarterly report, as amended, of the Company for the period ending June 30,
          2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (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.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | By:    /s/ Michael G. Sanchez    
         Michael G. Sanchez         Chief
Executive Officer         August 18, 2004
| |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | By:    /s/ Timothy S. Ayers    
          Timothy S. Ayers          Chief Financial Officer
          August 18, 2004
| |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Editorial Note on Part 20
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 20 appear at 57 FR 31451, July 16, 1992.

§ 20.34 Exclusions. ( a ) Agencies are not authorized by section 10 of the Debt Collection Act of 1982 (31 U.S.C. 3716) to use administrative offset with respect to: ( 1 ) Debts owed by any State or local Government;
( 2 ) debts arising under or payments made under the Social Security Act, the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or the tariff laws of the United States; or
( 3 ) any case in which collection of the type of debt involved by administrative offset is explicitly provided for or prohibited by another statute. However, unless otherwise provided by contract or law, debts or payments which are not subject to administrative offset under 31 U.S.C. 3716 may be collected by administrative offset under the common law or other applicable statutory authority, pursuant to this paragraph or agency regulations established pursuant to such other statutory authority.
( b ) This section should not be construed as prohibiting use of these authorities or requirements when collecting debts owed by persons employed by agencies administering the laws cited in the preceding paragraph unless the debt “arose under” those laws.
( c ) Collection by offset against a judgment obtained by a debtor against the United States shall be accomplished in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3728.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION FOR E N BANC R ECONSIDERATION

Appellate case name: Jonathan Beryl Harris; The Law Offices of J.B. Harris, P.A. and J.B. Harris, P.A. v. Phillip T. Howard, and Howard & Associates, Attorneys at Law, P.A.

Appellate case number: 01

- 19

- 00968

- CV

Trial court case number: 2019

- 22971

Trial court: 127th District Court of Harris County

The en banc court has voted to deny appellants’ motion for en banc reconsideration.

Accordin gly, it is ordered that the motion for en banc reconsideration is denied

.

En banc court consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes, Lloyd, Kelly, Goodman, Landau, Hightower, Countiss, and Adams.

Judge’s signature:

_____ / s/ Sarah B. Landau

_____________ Acting for the En Banc Court

Date: ____ December 3, 2020

______
EXHIBIT 21.  SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         Jurisdiction of
         Subsidiaries                     Incorporation            Ownership
         ------------                     -------------            ---------
<S>                                       <C>                       <C>
Webpulse Consulting, Inc.                 New Jersey                  100%
Distinctive Devices (India), PLC          India                     98.67%
International Gemsource Inc.              Delaware                    100%
Realtime Systems Ltd.*                    India                     99.97%
Galaxis technology ag                     Germany                     100%
OmniScience Multimedia Lab GmbH**         Germany                     100%
Convergence GmbH***                       Germany                     100%

<FN>
*   Owned by Distinctive Devices (India) PLC
**  Owned by galaxis technology ag
*** Owned by OmniScience Multimedia Lab GmbH
</FN>
</TABLE>