alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PUBLIC LAW 112–189—OCT. 5, 2012 126 STAT. 1435 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 6189: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 112–648 (Comm. on the Judiciary). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 158 (2012): 

Sept. 11, considered and passed House. 

Sept. 21, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 112–189 

112th Congress 

An Act 

To eliminate unnecessary reporting requirements for unfunded programs under 

the Office of Justice Programs. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reporting Efficiency Improvement 

Act’’. 

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF REPORTS FOR UNFUNDED PROGRAMS UNDER 

THE OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS. 

(a) DNA IDENTIFICATION GRANTS.—Section 2406 of title I of 

the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 

3796kk–5) is amended— 

(1) by striking ‘‘(a) REPORTS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL.—’’; 

and 

(2) by striking subsection (b). 

(b) POLICE CORPS PROGRAM.— 

(1) REPEAL OF REPORT REQUIREMENT.—Section 200113 of 

the Police Corps Act (42 U.S.C. 14102) is repealed. 

(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The Violent Crime Control 

and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is amended by striking 

the item relating to section 200113 in the table of contents 

contained in section 2 of such Act. 

Approved October 5, 2012. 

Reporting 

Efficiency 

Improvement 

Act. 

42 USC 3711 

note. 

Oct. 5, 2012 

[H.R. 6189] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
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 Environmental Solutions
Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company") for the three months period ended March 31, 2009
(the "Report"), David J. Johnson, Chief Executive Officer, and President of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1) To my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2) To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

                                           DATE: MAY 20, 2009

                                           /S/ DAVID J. JOHNSON
                                           --------------------
                                           DAVID J. JOHNSON
                                           CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRESIDENT

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Environmental Solutions Worldwide,
Inc. and will be retained by Environmental Solutions Worldwide, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4475 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4475

 To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 
   conduct a study to identify future funding options for financing 
 infrastructure projects under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 1994

    Mr. Franks of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. Clinger, Mr. Neal of 
 Massachusetts, Mr. Gingrich, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Bacchus of Florida, Mr. 
Boehner, Mr. Zimmer, and Mr. Gilchrest) introduced the following bill; 
 which was referred to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 
   conduct a study to identify future funding options for financing 
 infrastructure projects under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) Society cannot function without adequate water 
        pollution control facilities.
            (2) Deteriorated and leaking sewage pipes and collection 
        systems and antiquated wastewater treatment facilities threaten 
        public health and the environment.
            (3) The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 
        meeting the Nation's 20-year design needs for publicly-owned 
        wastewater treatment works will cost $137,000,000,000.
            (4) Federal and State expenditures for infrastructure 
        projects under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act will 
        continue to be constrained due to the enormity of the Federal 
        budget deficit unless alternative funding sources can be 
        identified.

SEC. 2. FUTURE FUNDING OPTIONS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS.

    (a) Study.--The Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
Agency shall conduct a study to identify and examine future funding 
options for financing infrastructure projects under the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act.
    (b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit to Congress a report 
containing the results of the study conducted under subsection (a).
    (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated to carry out this section $100,000 for fiscal year 1995.

                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                   AS ADDED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


    In connection with the Quarterly Report of Greater Atlantic Financial Corp.
(the "company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Carroll E. Amos, President and Chief Executive Officer of the company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

B.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the company
     as of and for the period covered by the Report.





                                       By: /s/ Carroll E. Amos
                                       -----------------------
                                       Carroll E. Amos
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       Date: May 13, 2009
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Updated Electronic Filing Procedures and Notice of Docketing Form - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"9WKo70Zi4I\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/updated-electronic-filing-procedures-and-notice-of-docketing-form\/\">Updated Electronic Filing Procedures and Notice of Docketing Form<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/updated-electronic-filing-procedures-and-notice-of-docketing-form\/embed\/#?secret=9WKo70Zi4I\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Updated Electronic Filing Procedures and Notice of Docketing Form” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"9WKo70Zi4I\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"The Clerk\u2019s Office has released an updated version of the Electronic Filing Procedures, which is now available on the court\u2019s website.\u00a0 A summary of the changes are listed on the revision control page.\u00a0 In addition, the Clerk\u2019s Office has updated the format of its Notices of Docketing, which will now include providing parties with the […]"}
Blueprint








EXHIBIT 10.13







 


AMENDMENT


TO


PUBLIC
RELATIONS AGREEMENT


 


THE PUBLIC RELATIONS AGREEMENT,
originally made effective as of the 21st day of October, 2015 by
and between VISUALANT
CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation having its principal place
of business located at 500 Union Street, Suite 420, Seattle,
Washington, 98101-4041 (hereinafter referred to as
(“COMPANY”)


AND


FINANCIAL GENETICS LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company having its principal office located at
205 Chestnut Drive, Roslyn, NY, 11576 (hereinafter referred to as
the “CONSULTANT”) is hereby amended on this
18th day
of October, 2016,


WITNESSETH THAT:


WHEREAS, the COMPANY, required financial
public relations services and has employed CONSULTANT as an
independent contractor consultant to provide such services, and the
parties now desire a written document formalizing the expanded
scope of the relationship and evidencing the terms of their amended
agreement;


AND WHEREAS the scope of the work
performed by CONSULTANT has expanded beyond the initial
contemplation of the parties and now includes advice and counsel on
capital raising, marketing advice, strategic counsel, shareholder
relations and other services as requested by the
COMPANY;


NOW, THEREFORE, intending to be legally
bound and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants,
the parties have agreed to amend their agreement as
follow:


1.           COMPENSATION.


Upon
the acceptance of this amendment agreement, and based upon the
performance of CONSULTANT during the term of this agreement, an
award of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND SHARES (200,000) of the
COMPANY’S commons stock will be issued to FINANCIAL GENETICS
LLC which shares will be restricted shares subject to Rule 144. The
shares shall be issued monthly (33,333 shares per month) over a
period of six months beginning on the date of the execution of this
agreement.


But for
the modification set forth above, all other elements of the
original agreement between the parties, dated October 21, 2015
remains in force and effect.


 


 


 



 

1







 






 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have
executed this Agreement as of the 18th day of October,
2016.


 


	


The Company

	
 

	


The Consultant


	


 

	
 

	


 


	


Visualant Corporation

	
 

	


Financial Genetics, LLC


	
 

	
 

	
 


	


/s/ Ron Erickson

	
 

	


/s/ Barry Bendett


	
 

	
 

	
 


	


Ron Erickson, CEO

	
 

	


Barry Bendett, President







 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 




 

2
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I, Alise Mills, Director and Vice-President of Corporate Communications of Veridigm, Inc.(the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:  1.  This Quarterly Report on 10-QSB of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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/ Alise Mills -------------------------------- Director, Vice-President: Corporate Communications  August 20, 2007
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Environmental
Solutions Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company") for the three months period ended
March 31, 2009 (the "Report"), Praveen Nair Chief Accounting Officer of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1). To my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2) To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

                                                        DATE: MAY 20, 2009

                                                        /S/ PRAVEEN NAIR
                                                        -----------------------
                                                        PRAVEEN NAIR
                                                        CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Environmental Solutions Worldwide,
Inc. and will be retained by Environmental Solutions Worldwide, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 11-9749.

#### Jolliffe *v.*Uttecht, Superintendent, Coyote Correctional Center.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 23.1




Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement Form S-8 (No. 333-07377) pertaining to the 1995 Stock Option Plan, in Registration Statement Form S-8 (No. 333-53400) pertaining to the Special Purpose Stock Option Plan, in Registration Statement Form S-8 (No. 333-73000) pertaining to the 2001 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, in Registration Statement Form S-8 (No. 333-73002) pertaining to the 2000 Stock Option Plan, in Registration Statement Form S-8 (No. 333-152706) pertaining to the SPAR Group, Inc. 2008 Stock Compensation Plan and in Registration Statement Form S-8 (No. 333-72998) pertaining to the 2001 Consultant Stock Purchase Plan of SPAR Group, Inc. of our report dated April 15, 2010, with respect to the December 31, 2009 and 2008 consolidated financial statements and schedule of SPAR Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A, for the year ended December 31, 2009.




/s/ Rehmann Robson







Troy, Michigan


October 5, 2010
§ 24.833 Post-auction divestitures. Any parties sharing a common non-controlling ownership interest who aggregate more PCS spectrum among them than a single entity is entitled to hold (*See* §§ 20.6(e), 24.710, 24.204, 24.229(c) of this chapter) will be permitted to divest sufficient properties within 90 days of the license grant to come into compliance with the spectrum aggregation limits as follows: ( a ) The broadband PCS applicant shall submit a signed statement with its long-form application stating that sufficient properties will be divested within 90 days of the license grant. If the licensee is otherwise qualified, the Commission will grant the applications subject to a condition that the licensee come into compliance with the PCS spectrum aggregation limits within 90 days of grant.
( b ) Within 90 days of license grant, the licensee must certify that the applicant and all parties to the application have come into compliance with the PCS spectrum aggregation limits. If the licensee fails to submit the certification within 90 days, the Commission will immediately cancel all broadband PCS licenses won by the applicant, impose the default penalty and, based on the facts presented, take any other action it may deem appropriate. Divestiture may be to an interim trustee if a buyer has not been secured in the required time frame, as long as the applicant has no interest in or control of the trustee, and the trustee may dispose of the property as it sees fit. In no event may the trustee retain the property for longer than six months from grant of license.
[59 FR 53371, Oct. 24, 1994]
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4551

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 20 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

OCTOBER 8 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Committee discharged

AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office building located

at 301 West Lexington Street in Independence, Missouri,

as the ‘‘William J. Randall Post Office’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The United States Post Office building located at 301

5 West Lexington Street in Independence, Missouri, shall be

6 known and designated as the ‘‘William J. Randall Post

7 Office’’.
2

•HR 4551 CDS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the building

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

5 to the William J. Randall Post Office.

Passed the House of Representatives September 19,

1994.

Attest: DONALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
**EXHIBIT 32.02**

** **

**SECTION 1350CERTIFICATION**

** **

In connection withthis annual report of ML Trend-Following Futures Fund L.P. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (this “Report”), I, Barbra E.Kocsis, Chief Financial Officer of MerrillLynch Alternative Investments LLC, the general partner of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1. This Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2. The informationcontained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: March 31,  2010     |                 |
|--------------------------------|----------------------|
|                           |                 |
| By                             | /s/ BARBRA E. KOCSIS |   |
| Barbra E. Kocsis               |                 |
| Chief Financial Officer        |                 |
| (Principal Financial  Officer) |                 |
|                                |                      |  |

 

2

----
DAVID OWENS HOOFER, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

RENEE BAKER, WARDEN, 

Respondent. 

No. 69107 

FILED 

JUN 1 7 2016 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE 

This is a pro se appeal from a district court order dismissing a 

postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus.' Seventh Judicial 

District Court, White Pine County; Steve L. Dobrescu, Judge. 

Appellant David Owens Hooper argues that the district court 

erred in dismissing his postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 

The district court dismissed the petition because this court had reversed 

Hooper's judgment of conviction, see Hooper v. State, Docket No. 63027 

(NIarch 26, 2015), such that there was no conviction or sentence from 

which habeas relief could be granted. See NRS 34.720 (setting forth the 

scope of petitions for postconviction habeas relief). Having reviewed the 

'Having considered the pro se brief filed by appellant, we conclude 

that a response is not necessary. NRAP 46A(c). This appeal therefore has 

been submitted for decision based on the pro se brief and the record. See 

NRAP 34(0(3). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 
J. 

record, we agree that postconviction relief is not warranted. 2Accordingly, 

we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 3 

CC: Hon. Steve L. Dobrescu, District Judge 

David Owens Hooper 

Attorney General/Carson City 

White Pine County District Attorney 

Attorney General/Ely 

White Pine County Clerk 

J. 

2Even construing the petition as seeking pretrial relief, we note that 

relief would not be warranted because (1) a challenge asserting a lack of 

probable cause must be filed in a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas 

corpus within 21 days of the petitioner's first appearance in district court, 

see NRS 34.700(1)(a), and Hooper did not file the underlying petition until 

more than 2 years after his first appearance and (2) Hooper's double 

jeopardy claim lacks merit, as double jeopardy does not bar retrial when a 

defendant is retried following the reversal and remand of a prior 

conviction, see Collier v. State, 103 Nev. 563, 565, 747 P.2d 225, 226 

(1987). 

3We deny Hooper's request for publication. See NRAP 36(c). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A mettr,