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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4980 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4980

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the bridge on United States Route 231 which crosses the 
   Ohio River between Maceo, Kentucky, and Rockport, Indiana, as the 
                     ``William H. Natcher Bridge''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The bridge on United States Route 231 which crosses the Ohio River 
between Maceo, Kentucky, and Rockport, Indiana, shall be known and 
designated as the ``William H. Natcher Bridge''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the bridge referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``William H. Natcher Bridge''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 22, 1994.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
                                     

103d CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4980

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the bridge on United States Route 231 which crosses the 
   Ohio River between Maceo, Kentucky, and Rockport, Indiana, as the 
                     ``William H. Natcher Bridge''.
```
#### § 90.739 Number of systems authorized in a geographical area.

There is no limit on the number of licenses that may be authorized to a single licensee.

[62 FR 46214, Sept. 2, 1997]
### 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 March 5, 2012

h0227 

# Order

March 5, 2012

144023

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144023 COA: 305320 PETER EDWARD LOUKAS, Maco mb CC: 2009-004308-FC Defendant-Appellant. 2009-004603-FC

___________________ _________________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 16, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 150 (Friday, August 4, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 44262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6713]


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

COMMODITY FUTURE TRADING


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, August 18, 2006.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Enforcement Matters.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eileen A. Donovan, 202-418-5100.

Eileen A. Donovan,
Acting Secretary of Commission.
[FR Doc. 06-6713 Filed 8-2-06; 10:33 am]
BILLING CODE 6151-01-M
V

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4730

To authorize issuance of a certificate of documentation with appropriate

endorsement for the vessel LADY ANGELA.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 12, 1994

Mrs. FOWLER of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to

the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

A BILL

To authorize issuance of a certificate of documentation with

appropriate endorsement for the vessel LADY ANGELA.

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

3 SECTION 1. Notwithstanding section 27 of the Mer4 chant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the Act

5 of June 19, 1886 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and sections

6 12106, 12107, and 12108 of title 46, United States Code,

7 as applicable on the date of this Act, the Secretary of

8 Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation

9 with appropriate endorsement for the vessel LADY AN10 GELA (United States official number 933045).
2

HR 4730 IH

Æ
Your session is about to expire.Resume session

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Welcome.Log inorregisterCOPS OFFICE RESOURCE CENTER

HomeCatalogCartOrders

                    

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                CatalogMatches: 1Offline form Recent Popular Online Print OtherCOPS-P086Law Enforcement Tech Guide for Small and Rural Police AgenciesThis practical and user-friendly guidebook is geared to the small and rural police agency, providing strategies, best practices, recommendations, and ideas for successful IT planning and implementation. Agencies with minimal personnel and financing can learn how to implement IT projects from preliminary project planning and project plan creation to technology acquisition, implementation, and maintenance. This guidebook complements the Law Enforcement Tech Guide: How to plan, purchase, and manage technology (successfully!). When used together, they make an impressive toolset for technology implementation.By William H. RomesburgCategories: TechnologyLanguage: EnglishPublic linkhttps://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter?item=cops-p086Click here to see the entire catalog.Cart:Download PDFPamphlet • Jul 2007Search catalogreset title abstract authors contentContaining text: exact phraseNot containing text: exact phraseLanguage:anyEnglishSpanishHmongVietnameseCategory:anyAlternatives to IncarcerationCommunity PartnershipsData and AnalysisEthics and IntegrityFoundations of Community PolicingHiring, Recruitment, and RetentionHomeland SecurityNew Immigrant CommunitiesNonviolent CrimeOtherPolice OperationsPOP Center ResourceSchool and Campus SafetyTechnologyTribalViolent CrimeYouth SafetyPublished after:Published before:Page1

                    

FOIA | No FEAR Act | Open Government | Privacy | Legal|HelpCopyright (C) U.S. Department of Justice, COPS Office, IT Division, 2012 - 2024. All rights reserved.
Rendered on Mon Mar 4 2024 at 02:31 (UTC-5) in 0.19 secEnterprise Framework 3.21.7.7 • Store Controls 3.3.1.7Survey 500303407 Section 60000560 Rules Hints Inactive
§ 80.413 On-board station equipment records. ( a ) The licensee of an on-board station must keep equipment records which show: ( 1 ) The ship name and identification of the on-board station;
( 2 ) The number and type of repeater and mobile units used on-board the vessel; and
( 3 ) The date and type of equipment which is added or removed from the on-board station.
( b ) [Reserved]
§ 73.4267 Time brokerage. ( a ) See Report and Order, MM Docket Nos. 94-150, 92-51, 87-154, FCC 99-207, adopted August 5, 1999, 64 FR 50622 (Sept. 17, 1999).
( b ) See § 73.3555, Note 2(j).
[47 FR 3792, Jan. 27, 1982, as amended at 59 FR 52087, Oct. 14, 1994; 89 FR 7262, Feb. 1, 2024]
#### § 76.1614 Identification of must-carry signals.

A cable operator shall respond in writing within 30 days to any written request by any person for the identification of the signals carried on its system in fulfillment of the must-carry requirements of § 76.56. The required written response may be delivered by email, if the consumer used email to make the request or complaint directly to the cable operator, or if the consumer specifies email as the preferred delivery method in the request or complaint.

[83 FR 66158, Dec. 26, 2018]
§ 90.559 Station Identification. ( a ) Conventional systems of communication shall be identified in accordance with existing regulations governing such matters.
( b ) Trunked systems of communication, except as noted in paragraph (c) of this section, shall be identified through the use of an automatic device which transmits the call sign of the base station facility at 30 minute intervals. Such station identification shall be made on the lowest frequency in the base station trunk group assigned the licensee. Should this frequency be in use at the time station identification is required, such identification may be made at the termination of the communication in progress on this frequency. Identification may be made by voice or International Morse Code. When the call sign is transmitted in International Morse Code, it must be at a rate of between 15 to 20 words per minute and by means of tone modulation of the transmitter, the tone frequency being between 800 and 1000 hertz.
( c ) Stations operating in the 769-775/799-805 MHz band that are licensed on an exclusive basis, and normally employ digital signals for the transmission of data, text, control codes, or digitized voice may also be identified by digital transmission of the call sign. A licensee that identifies its station in this manner must provide the Commission, upon its request, information sufficient to decode the digital transmission and ascertain the call sign transmitted.
[79 FR 39341, July 10, 2014]
32.2     Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of Genesis Capital
         Corporation of Nevada pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act
         of 2002


                            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-QSB of Genesis Capital
Corporation of Nevada (the "Company") for the quarter ended December 31, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned Christopher Astrom, Chief Financial Officer of
Genesis Capital Corporation of Nevada, 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 Company.

Dated: February 14, 2006

                                      /s/ CHRISTOPHER ASTROM
                                      -----------------------
                                      Christopher Astrom
                                      Chief Financial Officer
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-12-00272- CR

Ke vin How ard, Appellan t

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 390 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -DC- 10- 2073 99, H ONO RAB LE WI LF ORD F LOW ERS, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
A jury found appellant Kevin Howar d g uilty of two counts of ag g rav a te d r o b b e r y w it h

a deadly wea

pon. See Tex. Penal Code §§ 29.02(a) (1)–( 2), .03(a) (2). The jury assessed punishment at six ty y ear s’ imprisonment for ea ch count. Appellant’s court-a

ppointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appea l is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the require ments of Anders v. Calif

ornia by prese nting a profe ssional evalua tion of the rec ord demonstrating why there

are no arg

uable g rounds to be advanc ed. See An ders v. Calif ornia , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); G a r n e r v . S ta te , 3 0 0 S. W. 3 d 7 6 3 , 7 6 6 ( T e x. Cr im

. A p p . 2 0 0 9 ) ; s e e a ls o P e n s o n v . O h io , 4 8 8 U
. S. 7 5 , 86–87 (1988). Appellant rec eived a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his rig ht to examine the appellate rec ord and to f ile a pro se brief. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; Garner , 300 S.W .3d at 766. We have not re ceive d a pro se brief f rom appe llant.We have conducte d an independe nt revie w o f t h e rec ord, including appellate

c o u n s e l’ s b r ie f

, a n d f in d n o r e v e r s ib le e r

r o r . S e e A n d e r s , 3 8 6 U
. S. a

t 7 4 4 ; G a r n e r , 3 0 0 S. W. 3 d a

t 7 6 6 ; Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W .3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We ag ree with counsel that the

rec ord pre sents no arg uably meritorious g rounds for r eview a nd the appe al is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to wit hdrawis gr anted. The judgme nt of conviction is aff irmed.

__________________________________________ Scott K. Field, Just ice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Goodwin and F ield Affir med Filed: Jul y

3, 2013 Do Not Publish

2
§ 90.370 Permitted frequencies. ( a ) Dedicated Short-Range Communications Service (DSRCS) systems are permitted to operate in the 5895-5925 MHz band.
( b ) DSRCS authorizations granted prior to the July 2, 2021 may remain on existing frequencies in the 5850-5895 MHz band until July 5, 2022, at which time they may only operate in the 5895-5925 MHz band.
( c ) Frequencies in the 5895-5925 MHz band will not be assigned for the exclusive use of any licensee; Channels are available on a shared basis only for use in accordance with the Commission's rules. All licensees shall cooperate in the selection and use of channels in order to reduce interference. This includes monitoring for communications in progress and any other measures as may be necessary to minimize interference.
( d ) Licensees of Roadside Units (RSUs) suffering or causing harmful interference within a communications zone, as defined in § 90.375 of this part, are expected to cooperate and resolve this problem by mutually satisfactory arrangements. If the licensees are unable to do so, the Commission may impose restrictions including specifying the transmitter power, antenna height and direction, additional filtering, or area or hours of operation of the stations concerned. The use of any channel at a given geographical location may be denied when, in the judgment of the Commission, its use at that location is not in the public interest; use of any such channel may be restricted as to specified geographical areas, maximum power, or such other operating conditions, contained in this part or in the station authorization.
[86 FR 23297, May 3, 2021]
#### § 73.505 Zones.

For the purpose of assignment of noncommercial educational FM stations, the United States is divided into three zones, Zone I, Zone I-A, and Zone II, having the boundaries specified in § 73.205.

[42 FR 36828, July 18, 1977]
From: Higgins, Cortney [mailto:Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 2:14 PM 

To: Culligan, Kevin; Hoffman, Howard 

Cc: Wayland, Robertj; Elman, Barry 

Subject: Legal Memo -- question 

Hi, 

One question on the document: the preamble left a big blank spot where the legal issues were to 

be discussed in at least one place. Do you know if EPA is working on that and whether we will see 

it? 

If needed, would you be available for a call after 4 pm to discuss comments on the memo? 

Regards, 

Cortney
#### L. B. BALDWIN, ADMINISTRATOR, v. TOWN OF WORCESTER.

General Term, 1893.

*Evidence tending to show emancipation of child.*

That a child has become of full age is evidence tending to show its emancipation.

General assumpsit. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the September term, 1892, Chittenden county, Rowell, J., presiding. Verdict directed for the defendant, to which the plaintiff excepts.

The plaintiff brought suit for the support of the adult pauper son of his intestate. The court directed a verdict upon the ground that there was no consideration for the promise relied upon. In so doing it acted upon the supposition that the son was unemancipated, and so distinctly announced at the time, and counsel made no suggestion that such was not the fact, but allowed the case to be disposed of with that understanding upon the part of the court. The question decided appears in the opinion.

*D. J. Foster*and *Seneca Haselton*for the plaintiff.

The evidence tended to show that the pauper was emancipated. *Poultney*v. Glover, 23 Vt. 332; *Hardwich*v. *Paw let,*36 Vt. 320.

*55
      *S. C. Shurtleff*for the defendant.

The plaintiff, not having asked that the question of emancipation be submitted to the jury, cannot claim here that it should have been. *Seguin*v. Peterson, 45 Vt. 255 ; *State*v. Preston, 48 Vt. 12 ; *Hathaway,*Admr., v. *National Life Ins. Co.,*48 Vt. 335.

The evidence did not tend to show emancipation. *Poultney*v. *Glover,*23 Vt. 328 ; *Bradford*v. *Lunenburg,*5 Vt. 481.

TAFT, J.

The court below, understanding that the pauper was an unemancipated son of the plaintiff’s intestate, held that there was no consideration for the contract upon which the plaintiff claimed to recover, and directed a verdict for the defendant. If the fact of unemancipation was as understood and stated by the court, the ruling was correct. There was testimony tending to show that the pauper was emancipated; his becoming of full age, which appeared in evidence, afforded a presumption of it, unless the contrary was shown. If the pauper was emancipated, the ruling of the court was erroneous ; the testimony tending to show it, the question should have been submitted to the jury. In not so doing there was error.

*Judgment reversed and cause remanded.*
#### § 95.3163 OBU frequencies.

DSRCS On-Board Units (OBUs) are permitted to operate in the 5895-5925 MHz band.

[86 FR 23299, May 3, 2021]
#### § 101.17 [Reserved]
No. 11-6034.

#### Flowers *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 13.1

LOGO

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18,
United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Teléfonos de México, S.A.B. de C.V., a sociedad anónima bursátil de capitalvariable organized under the laws of Mexico (the Company),
does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2009 (the Form 20-F) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  |                               
|------------------- |  | ------------------------------
|                    | 
|Dated: May 11, 2011 |  |                               
|                    | 
|                    |  | /s/ Héctor Slim Seade         
|                    |  | Name: Héctor Slim Seade       
|                    |  | Title: Chief Executive Officer
|                    | 
|Dated: May 11, 2011 |  |                               
|                    | 
|                    |  | /s/ Adolfo Cerezo Pérez       
|                    |  | Name: Adolfo Cerezo Pérez     
|                    |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer
No. 10-1444.

#### Shum *v.*Intel Corp. et al.

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.

The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Robert F. Olson, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
of Stellent, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to
my knowledge:


     (1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended by Amendment No. 2, of the
Company for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies
with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ ROBERT F. OLSON
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                     Robert F. Olson
                                             Chairman of the Board, President
                                               and Chief Executive Officer


Dated: April 28, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Managed Pension Assets Partnership 1990-B, Ltd.'s balance sheet and statement of
operations contained in its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         185,528
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  70,532
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               262,952
<PP&E>                                         3,967,058
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,502,080)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 727,930
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          8,574
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     719,356
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   727,930
<SALES>                                        179,994
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               191,107
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  72,913<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                48,169
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            48,169
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   48,169
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0

<FN>
<F1>Includes lease operating expenses, production taxes and depreciation and
amortization expense.  Excludes general and administrative and interest expense.
</FN>


</TABLE>
- TN 77 1
No. 11-9341.

#### Conley *v.*Minnesota.

Ct. App. Minn. Cer-tiorari denied.