alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Argued and submitted February 25,

affirmed March 23, 1994

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*ADRIAN CANO CHACON, *Appellant.*

(10-92-03788; CA A76783)

870 P2d 271

Sally L. Avera argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Before Rossman, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Leeson, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*131PER CURIAM

Defendant pled guilty to unlawful possession and delivery of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992. He appeals the length of the post-prison supervision term. The state argues that, because defendant pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement, review is precluded under *State v. Adams,*315 Or 359, 847 P2d 397 (1993), and *State v. Johnston,*120 Or App 165, 851 P2d 1156 (1993), *rev den*317 Or 272 (1993), and that the 1993 amendment to ORS 138.222(2)(d) does not assist defendant.

We do not address the scope of our review under the amended provision. Defendant concurred in the 36-month post-prison supervision term at sentencing.1 We decline to exercise our discretion to review the unpreserved claim of error. *See State v. McEahern,*126 Or App 201, 867 P2d 568 (1994).

Affirmed.

1

 The following exchange took place between the court and defense counsel:

> “THE COURT: I will follow the negotiations. 18 months in the custody of the Department of Corrections on count one. 18 months on count 2 to run concurrent. There will be 36 months post prison supervision. Now that should only be 20 or 24 month post prison on category 6, no, I am sorry, a category 8, you are right. 36 months.

> “DEFENSE COUNSEL: And 6 would be 36, your Honor.”
§ 9.8 Obligation of fixed telephony providers to convey dispatchable location. ( a ) Providers of fixed telephony services shall provide automated dispatchable location with 911 calls beginning January 6, 2021.
( b ) [Reserved]
[84 FR 66760, Dec. 5, 2019, as amended at 85 FR 78022, Dec. 3, 2020]
EXHIBIT 32.1

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER OF DTOMI, INC.

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Dtomi,
Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, the undersigned, David M. Otto,
Chief Executive Officer and principal financial officer of Dtomi, Inc., does
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) such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30,
2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
quarter ended September 30, 2005 fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Dtomi, Inc.

Date: November 14, 2005

                                     /s/ David M. Otto
                                     ----------------------------------------
                                     David M. Otto
                                     Princial Executive Officer and principal
                                     financial officer during period covered by
                                     registrant's Form 10-QSB for the period
                                     ended September 30, 2005)
----

            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE         

No 9/2005

of 8 February 2005         

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following shall be added in point 6a (Directive 98/70/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Chapter XVII of Annex II to the Agreement:

The provisions of the Directive shall, for the purposes for the present Agreement, be read with the following adaptations:

Article 2

The texts of Directive 2003/17/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of theEuropean Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 9 February 2005, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 8 February 2005.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Richard WRIGHT            

----

(1)OJ L 130, 29.4.2004, p. 3.

(2)OJ L 76, 22.3.2003, p. 10.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

----
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 Jupitermedia Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Alan M. Meckler, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.

/s/ Alan M. Meckler
==============================
Alan M. Meckler
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
February 8, 2007
EXHIBIT 32


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63
OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE

as adopted pursuant to

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


      I,  Ronald  D.  Sloan,  the  chief  executive officer and chief financial
officer  of Can-Cal Resources Ltd., certify  that  (i)  the Quarterly Report on
Form  10-QSB/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, as filed  by  the  Company
with the  Securities and Exchange Commission, to which this Certification is an
Exhibit,  fully  complies  with  the  requirements  of  Section  13(a)  of  the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (ii) the information contained
in the Form  10-QSB  financial  statements  fairly  presents,  in  all material
respects,  the  financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  of  Can-Cal
Resources Ltd.



					/s/  Ronald D. Sloan
					----------------------------------
					Ronald D. Sloan,
					President, Chief Executive Officer
					and Chief Financial Officer
					Date:  May 22nd, 2006


This  certification  accompanies  this  Report  pursuant  to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by  the  Company  for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original  of  this  written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Can-Cal Resources  Ltd.  and  will be retained by Can-Cal Resources
Ltd. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request.
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 19, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 54866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7743]



[[Page 54866]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Application of Swift Air, LLC for Certificate Authority

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of order to show cause (Order 2006-9-10), Dockets OST-
2005-22880 and OST 2005-23329.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is directing all interested 
persons to show cause why it should not issue orders finding Swift Air, 
LLC fit, willing, and able, and awarding it certificates of public 
convenience and necessity to engage in interstate and foreign charter 
air transportation of persons, property and mail.

DATES: Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than 
September 27, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to objections should be filed in 
Dockets OST-2005-22880 and OST 2005-23329, and addressed to U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, (M-30, Room PL-401), 
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, and should be served 
upon the parties listed in Attachment A to the order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronale Taylor, Air Carrier Fitness 
Division (X-56, Room 6401), U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-9721.

    Dated: September 13, 2006.
Michael W. Reynolds,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 06-7743 Filed 9-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
#### § 10.11 Scope of definitions.

In addition and subject to definitions contained in applicable statutes and subsequent parts or sections of this subchapter B, words or their variants shall have the meanings ascribed in this subpart. Throughout this subchapter B words in the singular form shall include the plural, words in the plural form shall include the singular, and words in the masculine form shall include the feminine.
Order entered January 11, 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 21 - 01174 - CR No. 05 - 21 - 0117 5 - CR No. 05 - 21 - 0117 6 - CR RONALD AUSTIN ROBERSON , Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 1 94th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F 20 - 12217 - M , F20 - 22292 - M & F20 - 22365 - M O RDER Appellant filed a timely pro se notice of appeal in these appeals

. We ORDER the trial court to cond uct a hearing to determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled t o c ourt
- appointed counsel in th ese appeal s . If the trial court finds that appellant is ent itled t o court
- appointed counsel, we ORDER the t rial court to appoint an at torney to represent appellant in the appeal s . If the tria l court finds that appellant is not en titled to court

- appointed counsel, the trial court shalldetermine whether appellant w ill ret ain counsel to represent him in the appe al s and, if so , the name, S tate Bar number, an d contact information for retained

coun sel. We ORDER the trial court to tra ns m it any record of the hearing on counsel , including findings of fact, any orders, and a ny supp orting documentation, to this Court within THIRTY DA Y S of the date of this orde r. We ORDER D istrict C lerk Felicia Pitre to file supplementa l clerk ’ s record s conta i ning the appoint ment of counsel within THIRTY DA YS of the date of this orde r. We DIRECT the C lerk to send copie s of this order to t he Honorable Ernest White , Presiding Judge, 194 th Judicial District Court ; to Felicia Pitre , Dallas County Distric t Cle rk ; to Belinda Baraka, court reporter, 194th Judicial District Court; to Christina O ’ Neil, Chief Judicial S taff Counsel; and to the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office , Appellate Divisi on . We ABATE the appe al s to allow the trial c ourt an opportunity to comply wi th th is order. They will be reinstated when the supplemental clerk ’ s records are filed, the C o urt is notified th at appellate co unsel has been appointed , or the Court deems it appro priate to reinstate

. /s/ LANA MYERS JUSTI CE
P.1 

OAR Box 1850 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

78) IV-C-1 

Docket Number: 

A-90-07 

Printed 11/18/2008 11:09:28 AM Sheet 78 of 161 
4J*6

** > 

====== _ P.2 

a -°>D-O7 

2 5-'592 * tt n/-d-ol 

Paul T. Haluza 

Director, Government Relations and Public Affair 

Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association 

1325 Pennsylvania Ave, NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

Dear Mr. Haluza: 

The purpose of this letter is to recap our past discussions 

related to the impact of the proposed fuels and fuel additives 

registration regulations on small businesses and to follow up on 

some questions that arose during our meeting on Thursday, July 23, 

1992. 

You've spoken with Sheri Dunatchik and myself about MEMA's 

concerns regarding the impact our proposed regulations might have 

on your member aftermarket additive companies. As I mentioned to 

you, one of the reasons our proposal did not contain specific 

provisions for small businesses was a lack of adequate information 

from which to define a "small" fuel and fuel additive business. 

Your offer to collect information from your member companies that 

would be useful in this capacity is greatly appreciated. 

At our July 23rd meeting, I presented you with a list of data 

items that would be useful to EPA in developing a small business 

definition. You recommended that any survey MEMA prepared should 

be sent out to manufacturers no sooner than the week of September 

7, 1992 (Labor Day), so that most vacations and plant shut-downs 

would be over. This plan sounds very appropriate to me. You also 

expressed concern that a survey limited to only MEMA members might 

not be representative of the nationwide aftermarket industry and 

suggested that EPA provide company names and addresses of other 

non-member aftermarket manufacturers. Upon considering, we believe 

it would be inappropriate for us to provide such a mailing list, 

since this survey is being voluntarily undertaken by MEMA and our 

office's involvement should be minimal. However, you may want to 

consider contacting other trade organizations with small business 

members, such as the Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association 

(CSMA), to see if they may be interested in participating in this 

survey with you. The Senior Regulatory Counsel for CSMA is Mr. 

John E. DiFazio, Jr., (202-872-8110). 

At the close of this same meeting, I understand that you and 

other MEMA staff would begin developing a survey. Perhaps you 
P.3 

J. >-*••—. 

would like me to review a draft. I am also available to answer any 

questions you may have and can be reached at (313) 668-4274. I 

look forward to working with you further. 

Sincerely, 

Carolyn Krueger 

Chemical Engineer 

Special Regulatory Projects Branch
PennsylvaniaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtectionRachelCarsonStateOfficeBuildingP.O.Box2063Harrisburg,PA17105-2063JUN292009SecretaryMr.WilliamC.EarlyActingRegionalAdministratorU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,RegionIII1650ArchStreet(MailCode:3RAOO)Philadelphia,PA19103-2029RECEIVEDJUL022009EPA.REGIONIIIOmCEOFREGIONALADMINISTRATOR717-787-2814DearMr.Early:InDecember2008,theU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)indicatedthatanumberofareasinPennsylvaniawouldbedesignatedasnonattainmentfortherevised24-hourfineparticulate(PM2.5)NationalAmbientAirQualityStandard(NAAQS)basedonmonitoringdatafrom2005through2007.Afterreviewingdatafor2008,wehavedeterminedthatconcentrationsatthemonitorlocatedintheReading(BerksCounty)areahavedeclinedsothatthismonitornowmeasuresairqualitymeetingthe24-hourfineparticulate(PM25)standard.Becauseofanticipatedcontrolswithinandupwindofthisarea,itisunlikelythatthismonitorwillexceedthe24-hour(PM25)standardinthefuture.WethereforerequestthatEPAre-evaluateitsnonattainmentdesignationfortheReadingareaandaskthatthisareabedesignatedasattainment.TheFebruary5,2009,lettercertifyingambientconcentrationdatafor2008isenclosed.Thankyouforconsideringourrequest.Shouldyouhaveanyquestionsorneedadditionalinformationconcerningourrequest,pleasecontactJoyceE.Epps,Director,BureauofAirQuality,bye-mailatjeepps@state.pa.usorbytelephoneat717-787-9702.Enclosure,pcerely,SecretaryRECE1vEtJUL22009Diwi8llact3r(3AP)AnEqualOpportunityEmployerwww.dep.state.pa.usPrintedonRecycledPaperPennsylvaniaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtectionRachelCarsonStateOfficeBuildingP.O.Box8468harrisburg,PA17105-8468February5,2009BureauofAfrQuality717-787-6548Mr.WilliamWisniewskiActingRegionalAdministratorUSEnvironmentalProtectionAgencyRegion31650ArchStreet,MailStop3RAOOPhiladelphia.PA19103-2029DearMr.Wisniewski:Iherebycertifythat,tothebestofmyknowledge,accordingto40CodeofFederalRegulations(CFR)Part58,thePennsylvania2008PM2.5FRMambientconcentrationdataandthequalityassurancedataarecompletelysubmittedtotheAirQualitySystem(AQS)database,andtheambientdataareaccuratetakingintoconsiderationthequalityassurancefindings.Inaddition,Icertifythatthedatacollectionproceduresconformtotheapplicablequalityassurance,airmonitoringmethodology,probesitingcriteriaandreportingrequirementsinPart58oftheCFR,AppendicesA,C,EandF.IamenclosingcopiesoftheAMP255andAMP450reportsforyourreference.Asrequiredby40CFRPart58.15,alettercertifyingthesubmissionandaccuracyoftheothercriteriaandnon-criteriapollutantswillbesubmittedtotheUSEnvironmentalProtectionAgencynolaterthanJuly1,2009.Ifyouhaveanyquestions,youcancallmeat(717)787-6548.Sincerely,JeffreyMiller,EPMDivisionofAirQualityMonitoringEnclosureCc:CathleenKennedy(EPARegionIII)AnEqualOppoctunltyEmployerwww4ep.state.pa.usPrIntedonRecydedPaper
###### Editorial Note on Part 300

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 300 appear at 64 FR 44431, Aug. 16, 1999, and at 76 FR 59305, Sept. 26, 2011.

#### § 300.302 Port entry by foreign, listed IUU vessels.

The Assistant Administrator may, in accordance with applicable provisions of RFMO conservation and management measures, deny a foreign, listed IUU vessel entry to any port or place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, except in cases of *force majeure.*
#### § 12.1 What is the purpose of the regulations in this part?

These regulations provide procedures that govern the seizure and administrative forfeiture or abandonment of property, as well as the disposal of such property, and the recovery of costs associated with handling and storage of seized property under various laws enforced by the Service.
[Civ. No. 15539.

Second Dist., Div. Two.

Jan. 29, 1947.]

#### ERASTUS NEIL SANDERS, Appellant, v. MARGARET MAGEE, Respondent.

Erastus Neil Sanders in pro. per. for Appellant.

Chauncey Gardner, Percy Drabin and Claude B. Morton for Respondent.

McCOMB, J.

From a judgment in favor of defendant after a trial before the court without a jury in an action to establish a partnership, a trust, and for an accounting, plaintiff appeals.

There are two questions necessary for us to determine which will be stated and answered hereunder seriatim:

First: *Was there substantial evidence to sustain these findings of the trial court?*

> (a). *“And the court further finds that all of said property [referring to the property described in the*complaint] *both real and personal, was purchased individually at about said time, and that the defendant paid the entire purchase price thereof from her own funds. . . .*

> *839(b). *“That the defendant did not repudiate any agreement, or any purported agreement, with the plaintiff; that at no time was there any agreement between the parties to engage in or to carry on any business as copartners or otherwise jointly, relative to the herein described real and personal property, or relative to any other property or any agreement wherein and whereby the defendant should hold said or any property in her name, as trustee, for the joint use and benefit of the parties.”*

This question must be answered in the affirmative. The foregoing findings find substantial support in defendant’s testimony that the real and personal property described in the complaint had been paid for by her with her own money, and that plaintiff had not made any payments on any of the property nor did he have any interest therein.

Defendant further testified that she and plaintiff never discussed or had any understanding relative to their entering into a partnership, joint enterprise or a joint ownership of the property described in the complaint. Such testimony constitutes substantial evidence to sustain the questioned findings.

Second: *Was there substantial evidence to sustain the portion of the judgment of the trial court reading as follows:*

> *“That the defendant is the sole owner of all the real and personal property described in plaintiff's complaint herein and that plaintiff has no right, title or interest in and to any of said property.”*

This question must likewise be answered in the affirmative. The evidence heretofore set forth fully supports the provision in the judgment just quoted.

Judgment affirmed.

Moore, P. J., and Wilson, J., concurred.

Appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied March 27, 1947.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5259

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude long-term capital

gains from gross income.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 7, 1994

Mr. DREIER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude

long-term capital gains from gross income.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME FOR LONG4 TERM CAPITAL GAINS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part III of subchapter B of chap6 ter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to

7 items specifically excluded from gross income) is amended

8 by redesignating section 137 as section 138 and by insert9 ing after section 136 the following new section:
2

•HR 5259 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 137. 100 PERCENT EXCLUSION FOR LONG-TERM CAP2 ITAL GAIN.

3 ‘‘Gross income shall not include 100 percent of any

4 long-term capital gain recognized on the sale or exchange

5 of any property.’’

6 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

7 for such part III is amended by striking the last item and

8 inserting the following new items:

‘‘Sec. 137. 100 percent exclusion for long-term capital gain.

‘‘Sec. 138. Cross references to other Acts.’’

9 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

10 this section shall apply to sales and exchanges occurring

11 after December 31, 1994, in taxable years ending after

12 such date.

Æ
PUBLIC LAW 108–125—NOV. 11, 2003 117 STAT. 1347

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 470 (H.R. 1209):

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 108–203 accompanying H.R. 1209 (Comm. on Resources).

SENATE REPORTS: No. 108–90 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 149 (2003):

July 17, considered and passed Senate.

Oct. 28, considered and passed House.

Æ

Public Law 108–125

108th Congress

An Act

To extend the authority for the construction of a memorial to

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. MEMORIAL TO MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

Section 508(b) of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–333), as amended, is amended

to read as follows:

‘‘(b) COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS FOR COMMEMORATIVE

WORKS.—(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the establishment

of the memorial shall be in accordance with chapter 89 of title

40, United States Code.

‘‘(2) Notwithstanding section 8903(e) of title 40, United States

Code, the authority provided by this section terminates on

November 12, 2006.’’.

Approved November 11, 2003.

Termination

date.

40 USC 8903

note.

Nov. 11, 2003

[S. 470]