alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 52.3 General.

The Commission shall have exclusive authority over those portions of the North American Numbering Plan (NANP) that pertain to the United States. The Commission may delegate to the States or other entities any portion of such jurisdiction.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 3, 2011

t0531 

# Order

June 3, 2011

142616

WILLIAM D. HARDER, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142616 COA: 298975 WCAC: 09-000196 CASTLE BLUFF APARTMENTS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 27, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question pres ented should be reviewed by this Court. We note that, contrary to the analysis provided by th e Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission (WCAC), MCL 418.361(1) applie s at all times to partially disabled workers, see Lofton v AutoZone, Inc , 482 Mich 1005 (2008), bu t the magistrate in this case found, and the record supports, that the plaintiff did no t have the ability to earn wages within his qualifications and training, and the WCAC th erefore properly affirmed the magistrate’s
decision.

C AVANAGH

, M ARILYN K ELLY , and H ATHAWAY , JJ., would deny leave to appeal
without the further st atement found in the majority’s order.
Exhibit 99.1

                            PALOMAR ENTERPIRSES, INC.

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


I, Jeffery Halbirt, solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
hereby certify that to my knowledge the Quarterly Report of Palomar Enterprises,
Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in
all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
Palomar Enterprises, Inc.


                                      By: /s/ Jeffery Halbirt
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Jeffery Halbirt Chief Executive Officer
No. 11-32.

#### Wells Fargo Bank, N. A. *v.*Issacs et al.

Ct. App. Ohio, Hamilton County. Certiorari denied.
Grad Form v2011‐08‐11

Application for Graduate Program Completion

icollegeoss@ndu.edu

Fax: 202‐685‐4860

INSTRUCTIONS

NDU iCollege students who have met the requirements for a certificate program and/or the Government

Information Leadership (GIL) Master of Science Program must complete and return this “Application for

Graduate Program Completion” by email directly to the NDU iCollege (as an attachment) to

icollegeoss@ndu.edu or by fax to 202-685-4860.  

TRANSCRIPTS

The NDU Registrar's Office prepares and mails all transcripts for the university.  The request form is available at

http://www.ndu.edu/AA/Transcript_Request_Form.pdf.  

QUESTIONS?

If you have any questions regarding the requirements for graduation or the Application for Graduate Program

Completion please contact the iCollege Academic Advisor at logann@ndu.edu.

COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING:

Name (Last, First MI):    ___________________________________________________  

(Please include prefix and suffix, if applicable. Use full legal name.)

Email:      ___________________________________________________

Telephone:    ___________________________________________________

Completed Graduate Programs (mark all that apply):

Place

X

Certificate Programs Place

X

GIL Master of Science Concentrations

Architect Certificate Chief Financial Officer (CFO)

Chief Enterprise Architect Certificate Chief Information Officer (CIO)

Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Leadership Certificate Chief Technology Officer (CTO)

Chief Information Officer Certificate (CIO) Cyber‐Leadership (Cyber‐L)

Chief Information Security Officer Certificate (CISO) Cyber‐ Security (Cyber‐S)

Chief Technology Officer Certificate (CTO) Enterprise Architecture (EA)

CNSS 4012/NSTISSI 4015/CNSSI 4016 Certificate Government Strategic Leader (GSL)

Cyber‐Leadership Certificate (Cyber‐L) Information Operations (IO)

Enterprise Architect Certificate Information Technology Program Management

(ITPgM)

Government Strategic Leader Certificate (GSL)

Information Operations Certificate (IO)

Information Technology Program Management Certificate (ITPgM)

Information Technology Project Management Certificate (ITPM)

NSTISSI 4011 Certificate

Student Signature:  _________________________________________   Date:  _____________________________
No. 11-5284.

#### Welch *v.*Workman, Warden.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
```

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 16, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 47079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6949]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2006-25007; Airspace Docket No. 06-ACE-5]

Modification of Class E Airspace; Scottsbluff, NE

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This document confirms the effective date of the direct final 
rule which revises Class E airspace at Scottsbluff, NE.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, September 28, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Grant Nichols, Airspace Branch, ACE-
520G, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: (816) 
329-2522.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published this direct final rule 
with a request for comments in the Federal Register on June 26, 2006 
(71 FR 36190). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a 
non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no 
adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that 
no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse 
comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse 
comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would 
become effective on September 28, 2006. No adverse comments were 
received, and thus this notice confirms that this direct final rule 
will become effective on that date.

    Issued in Kansas City, MO on August 2, 2006.
Donna R. McCord,
Acting Area Director, Western Flight Services Operations.
[FR Doc. 06-6949 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
```
No. 11-5338.

#### Washington *v.*Neven, Warden, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
DISMSS and Opinion Filed July 9, 2015.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-14-01404-CV

NASROLLAH JAFARZADEH AND IDA ENGINEERING, INC., Appellants

V.

MONIREH MAJD RAVANBAKSHS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 366-53521-2012

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Fillmore, Myers, and Evans 

Opinion by Justice Evans

Before the Court is appellee’s June 23, 2015 motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellee 

contends the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution because appellants have failed 

to file their briefs that are over two months past due. Appellants did not file a response to the 

motion to dismiss or otherwise communicate with the Court and have not filed a brief. 

Accordingly, we grant appellee’s motion and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b).

141404F.P05

/ David Evans/

DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

NASROLLAH JAFARZADEH AND 

IDA ENGINEERING, INC., Appellants

No. 05-14-01404-CV V.

MONIREH MAJD RAVANBAKSHS, 

Appellee

On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District 

Court, Collin County, Texas.

Trial Court Cause No. 366-53521-2012.

Opinion delivered by Justice Evans. 

Justices Fillmore and Myers, participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee MONIREH MAJD RAVANBAKSHS recover her costs of 

this appeal from appellants NASROLLAH JAFARZADEH AND IDA ENGINEERING, INC..

Judgment entered this 9th day of July, 2015.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4638

To consolidate the administration of defense economic conversion activities

in the Executive Office of the President.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 23, 1994

Ms. SNOWE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Government Operations

A BILL

To consolidate the administration of defense economic

conversion activities in the Executive Office of the President.

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

3 SECTION 1. CONSOLIDATION OF ADMINISTRATION OF DE4 FENSE ECONOMIC CONVERSION ACTIVITIES

5 IN THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESI6 DENT.

7 (a) CONSOLIDATION OF PROGRAMS.—The President

8 shall consolidate within, and coordinate through, the Exec9 utive Office of the President all defense conversion, rein-
2

•HR 4638 IH

1 vestment, and transition assistance programs of the De2 partment of Defense.

3 (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF SPECIAL ASSISTANT.—(1)

4 For a five-year period beginning on the date of the enact5 ment of this Act, there is established in the Executive Of6 fice of the President a Special Assistant to the President

7 for Economic and Defense Conversion who shall be re8 sponsible for coordinating all defense conversion, reinvest9 ment, and transition assistance programs. The Special As10 sistant shall also be a member of the National Economic

11 Council in the Executive Office of the President.

12 (2) The Special Assistant for Economic and Defense

13 Conversion shall have the authority to bring interagency

14 disputes regarding defense conversion, reinvestment, and

15 transition assistance programs directly to the President

16 for resolution based on the recommendations of the Spe17 cial Assistant.

18 (c) TRANSFER OF OFFICE OF ECONOMIC ADJUST19 MENT.—During such period, the Secretary of Defense

20 shall transfer the Office of Economic Adjustment of the

21 Department of Defense to the jurisdiction of the National

22 Economic Council in the Executive Office of the President.

23 (d) TRANSFER OF ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS

24 AGENCY.—During such period, the Secretary of Defense

25 shall transfer the Advanced Research Projects Agency of
3

•HR 4638 IH

1 the Department of Defense to the jurisdiction of the Na2 tional Economic Council in the Executive Office of the

3 President.

4 (e) TRANSFER OF ECONOMIC CONVERSION INFORMA5 TION EXCHANGE.—During such period, the Secretary of

6 Commerce shall transfer the Economic Conversion Infor7 mation Exchange of the Department of Commerce to the

8 jurisdiction of the National Economic Council in the Exec9 utive Office of the President.

10 (f) TIME FOR TRANSFERS.—The transfers required

11 by subsections (c) and (d) shall be made not later than

12 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

________________________

No. 07-13-00128-CR 

________________________

DAVID WAYNE KERR, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

 

On Appeal from the 181ST District Court 

Randall County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 21,768-B; Honorable John B. Board, Presiding 

 

November 13, 2013 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ABATE 

AND SEVERING APPEAL 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

 On January 19, 2012, pursuant to a single, multi-count indictment in Cause No. 

21,768-B, the trial court entered two separate orders placing Appellant, David Wayne 

Kerr, on eight years deferred adjudication community supervision for the offense of 

aggravated sexual assault.1 On January 16, 2013, the State filed a single motion 

 

1

TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.021 (West Supp. 2013).
2

seeking revocation of both orders. Following a plea as to each allegation in the State’s 

motion, the Court found Appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his 

community supervision and, without specifying as to which count, globally sentenced 

him to 75 years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The trial 

court then entered two separate judgments – one as to Count I and one as to Count II, 

both assessing a sentence of 75 years. Appellant filed a single notice of appeal 

indicating he wished to appeal “the judgment of conviction and sentence” in Cause No. 

21,768-B.

Appellant has now filed a brief contending he is uncertain as to which count the 

trial court pronounced sentence. In response, the State has filed a motion to abate and 

remand, contending the trial court’s failure to specifically pronounce sentence as to 

each count can be corrected by remanding the cause to the trial court so it may properly 

impose sentence pursuant to Rule 44.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

Because we believe the error, if any, of the trial court does not prevent the proper 

presentation of the case to this Court, we deny that motion. In light of our denial of the 

State’s motion to abate and remand, we sua sponte extend the deadline for the filing of 

the State’s brief until December 13, 2013.

Because this appeal involves two separate judgments, for purposes of clarity, we 

sua sponte sever this appeal into separate cause numbers, one as to each judgment. 

Henceforth, the appeal of the judgment entered as to Count I will bear appellate Cause 

No. 07-13-00128-CR, whereas the appeal of the judgment entered as to Count II will 

bear appellate Cause No. 07-13-00380-CR. 
3

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
#### § 22.759 Power limit for BETRS.

The effective radiated power of central office and rural subscriber station transmitters used in basic exchange telephone radio systems must not exceed the limits in this section.

(a) *Maximum ERP.* The effective radiated power (ERP) of central office and rural subscriber station transmitters in BETRS must not exceed the applicable limits in this paragraph under any circumstances.

| Frequency range (MHz) | Maximum ERP (watts) |
| --- | --- |
| 152-153 | 1400 |
| 157-159 | 150 |
| 454-455 | 3500 |
| 459-460 | 150 |

(b) *Height-power limit.* The ERP of central office stations in BETRS must not exceed the amount calculated as follows:

ERPw = 557,418 ÷ hm2

where ERPw is the effective radiated power in Watts

hm is the average (eight cardinal radial) antenna height above average terrain in meters
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As

Adopted Pursuant To Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, John H. Eyler, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of Toys R Us, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | 1. | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended January 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                               
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ John H. Eyler, Jr.                                                         
|John H. Eyler, Jr. Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
|(Principal Executive Officer)                                                  
|April 14, 2004
No. 11-5516.

#### Bowens *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 2.932 Modification of equipment. ( a ) A new application for an equipment authorization shall be filed whenever there is a change in the design, circuitry or construction of an equipment or device for which an equipment authorization has been issued, except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.
( b ) Permissive changes may be made in certificated equipment, and equipment that was authorized under the former type acceptance procedure, pursuant to § 2.1043.
( c ) Permissive changes may be made in equipment that was authorized under the former notification procedure without submittal of information to the Commission, unless the equipment is currently subject to authorization under the certification procedure. However, the grantee shall submit information documenting continued compliance with the pertinent requirements upon request.
( d ) All requests for permissive changes must be accompanied by the anti-drug abuse certification required under § 1.2002 of this chapter.
( e ) All requests for permissive changes shall be accompanied by: ( 1 ) A written and signed certification that, as of the date of the filing of the request for permissive change, the equipment to which the change applies is not prohibited from receiving an equipment authorization pursuant to § 2.903;
( 2 ) An affirmative or negative statement as to whether the applicant is identified on the Covered List, established pursuant to § 1.50002 of this chapter, as an entity producing covered communications equipment; and
( 3 ) The written and signed certifications required under § 2.911(d)(7).
[63 FR 36598, July 7, 1998, as amended at 66 FR 50840, Oct. 5, 2001; 70 FR 23039, May 4, 2005; 80 FR 33441, June 12, 2015; 88 FR 7624, Feb. 6, 2023]
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


     In  connection   with   the   accompanying   Annual  Report   of  Concierge
Technologies,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended June 30,
2003  (the  "Report"), I, Allen E. Kahn, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby  certify  that  to  my  knowledge:

     (1)     The Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated:  October  9,  2003

                                   /s/  Allen  E.  Kahn

                                   Allen  E.  Kahn
                                   Chairman  and  Chief  Executive  Officer


     The  above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of 2002 (18 U.S.C.  1350) and is not being filed as part of
the  Form  10-KSB  or  as  a  separate  disclosure  document.





                                                                      Exhibit 32
                                                                Page 1 of 1 Page
# Vacancy: Assistant/Associate/Professor of Systems, Technology and Management

/ Published Jan. 11, 2017

CLICK HERE TO APPLY 

## 

##
# Former DNI Mike McConnell speaks to college

/ Published March 9, 2016
The former Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Vice Admiral (Ret.) John M. "Mike" McConnell, spoke to NDU iCollege students, faculty, and staff today during a college distinguished lecture program.  He spoke of the importance of national intelligence and the changes this field has seen over the last many years.  Mr. McConnell also addressed today's issues of cyber security and federal agencies collaborating to keep the nation safe. Mike McConnell is a Senior Executive Advisor and former Vice Chairman of Booz Allen Hamilton, where his primary roles included serving on the firm’s Leadership Team and leading Booz Allen’s cyber security business. After retiring from the Navy in 1996 as a Vice Admiral, Mr. McConnell joined Booz Allen, and led the development of the firm’s Information Assurance business and the firm’s Intelligence business focused on policy, transformation, homeland security, and intelligence analytics, rising to the position of senior vice president.Upon being asked by President George W. Bush in 2007 to become the second Director of National Intelligence (DNI), he left Booz Allen and served as the DNI for two years under Presidents Bush and Obama. As the DNI he managed the expansive national Intelligence Community – an organization of over 100,000 people, and an annual global enterprise budget of over $50B – and had extensive interactions with the White House, the President’s Cabinet, Congress, international leaders, and the US business community.Please direct any questions to the iCollege Director of Outreach at coopersmithp@ndu.edu.  Thank you.
243P15

#### State v. Steven L. Lowery

Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA14-1306)

Denied