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



Certification Pursuant To
Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Sun-Times Media Group, Inc. (the
registrant);
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;
 3.
    
    [Not applicable]
 4.
    
    [Not applicable]
 5.
    
    [Not applicable]
  /s/ Cyrus F. Freidheim, Jr.Name:
    Cyrus F. Freidheim, Jr.Title:
    President and Chief Executive Officer
<pre>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Mobile Nation, Inc.
(the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005 (the
"Report"), the undersigned hereby certify in their capacities as Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively,
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, 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.


Dated: November 14, 2005        By:  /S/ REX MORDEN
                                -------------------
                                Rex A. Morden
                                Chief Executive Officer
                                (principal executive officer)


Dated: November 14, 2005        BY:  /S/  MICHAEL MCGHEE
                                --------------------------
                                Michael McGhee
                                Executive President, Finance
                                (principal financial and accounting
                                officer)
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Arnold Brown d/b/a Arnold Brown Construction Company v. Monica

Hankins

Appellate case number: 01

- 15

- 00898

- CV

Trial court case number: 2011

- 49521

Trial court: 189th District Court of Harris County

Appellant’s notice of appeal states he is appealing from an August 21, 2015 order denying appellant’s motion to set aside a previous interlocutory order, signed September 27,

2015. 

### We have jurisdiction to hear an int erlocutory appeal only if authorized by statute.

See T EX



### . C IV



### . P RAC



### . & R EM



### . C ODE 

### A NN 

### . § 51.014 (West Supp. 20 15 ); Stary v. DeBord

, 967 S.W.2d 352, 352

– 53 (Tex. 1998).

On December 1, 2015, appellee filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the order is

interl ocutory and appellant has not paid for the clerk’s record in this case. We held this motion for a response, but none was filed.

Unless appellant causes a supplemental clerk’s record containing documents showing the trial court has entered a final judgmen t or files a response demonstrating by citation to the law that this Court has jurisdiction of the appeal, this appeal will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See T EX



### . R. A PP



### . P . 42.3(a), 43.2(f). Appellant’s response, if any, is due in this Court within 10 days of the date of this notice

.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: December 17, 2015
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H.R. 486

AN ACT

To provide for the addition of the Truman Farm

Site in the State of Missouri.Home to the Harry S Truman National Historic
103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H.R. 486

AN ACT

To provide for the addition of the Truman Farm Home

to the Harry S Truman National Historic Site in the

State of Missouri.

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

3 SECTION 1. PROPERTY ACQUISITION

4 The first section of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to estab5 lish the Harry S Truman National Historic Site in the

6 State of Missouri, and for other purposes’’, approved May

7 23, 1983 (97 Stat. 193), is amended by adding at the end

8 the following:
2

•HR 486 EH

1 ‘‘(c) The Secretary is further authorized to acquire

2 from Jackson County, Missouri, by donation, the real

3 property commonly referred to as the Truman Farm

4 Home located in Grandview, Jackson County, Missouri,

5 together with associated lands and related structures,

6 comprising approximately 5.2 acres.

7 ‘‘(d) The Secretary is authorized and directed to pro8 vide appropriate political subdivisions of the State of Mis9 souri with technical and planning assistance for the devel10 opment and implementation of plans, programs, regula11 tions, or other means for minimizing the adverse effects

12 on the Truman Farm House of the development and use

13 of adjacent lands.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 23

(legislative day, November 22), 1993.

Attest:

Clerk.
```

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

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4980

 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''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            August 17, 1994

   Mr. Lewis of Kentucky (for himself, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Rogers, Mr. 
 Mazzoli, Mr. Baesler, and Mr. Barlow) introduced the following bill; 
 which was referred to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 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''.
                                 <all>
```
###### 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.

#### § 300.144 Penalties and sanctions.

Any person, any fishing vessel, or the owner or operator of any such vessel, who violates any provision of the Agreement or this subpart, is subject to the civil and criminal fines, penalties, forfeitures, permit sanctions, or other sanctions provided in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, part 600 of this title, 15 CFR part 904 (Civil Procedures), and any other applicable law or regulation.
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 Report of Apollo Medical
Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2015 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mitchell R. Creem, Chief Financial Officer and Principal
Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany
the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after
the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.



|Dated:  August 19, 2015 | By: | Mitchell R. Creem      
|----------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|                        |     |                        
|                        |     | /s/ Mitchell R. Creem  
|                        |     |                        
|                        |     | Chief Financial Officer
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-60190

Conference Calendar

__________________

LAFELDT RUDD,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SANDRA DAVIS ET AL.,

 Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:94-cv-561LN

- - - - - - - - - -

(October 18, 1995)

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

An in forma pauperis complaint may be dismissed as frivolous

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) if it has no arguable basis in

law or in fact. Booker v. Koonce, 2 F.3d 114, 115 (5th Cir.

1993); see Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992). 

Section 1915(d) dismissals are reviewed for abuse of discretion. 

Id. at 34. 

Appellees Sanders, Wingate, and Peters are entitled to

absolute immunity from suit for damages in 42 U.S.C. § 1983

actions arising out of acts performed in the exercise of their
No. 95-60190

-2-

judicial and prosecutorial functions. Boyd v. Biggers, 31 F.3d

279, 284 (5th Cir. 1994) (prosecutorial immunity); Graves v.

Hampton, 1 F.3d 315, 317 (5th Cir. 1993) (judicial immunity). 

Lafeldt Rudd's claims against the remaining defendants call into

question the validity of his conviction and sentence and may not

be considered in a § 1983 action, under the rule in Heck v.

Humphrey, 114 S. Ct. 2364, 2372 (1994), because Rudd has not

demonstrated that his conviction and sentence have been

invalidated. 

There was no abuse of discretion in dismissing the complaint

without providing Rudd with an opportunity to amend his pleadings

because it does not appear that the deficiencies in his pleadings

could be remedied through more specific pleading. See Eason v.

Thaler, 14 F.3d 8, 9-10 (5th Cir. 1994). Under § 1915(d), Rudd

was not entitled to conduct discovery prior to dismissal of his 

complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). 

The appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. 

Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 219, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because

the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. 

Rudd is WARNED that the filing of frivolous appeals in the future

will result in the imposition of sanctions.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

The National Institute on Aging and several other Institutes of the National Institutes of Health will hold a conference entitled “Conference on Alzheimer's Disease: Setting the Research Agenda a Century after Auguste D” on October 26-27, 2006. The purpose of the conference is to discuss future directions for the NIH Alzheimer's disease research agenda. The focus of the conference will be on discussing the research issues that must be addressed in order to provide more efficacious diagnostics and therapeutics to patients and their families.

The conference will include a series of 30 minute presentations by experts in covering a broad spectrum of Alzheimer's disease research. The speakers will provide an overview of where research in a particular field is now and discuss what the critical questions and issues are that must be addressed to move the field forward.

                    Persons interested in attending the conference should register at:                     *http://www.tech-res-intl.com/​nia/​alzheimers_​conference/​default.htm.*

Registration is free but seating is limited. The Web site also provides information about hotel accommodations.

Dated: September 12, 2006.

Neil Buckholtz, 

Chief, Dementias of Aging Branch, Neuroscience and Neuropsychology of Aging Program, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health.

[FR Doc. 06-7732 Filed 9-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.2
  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) I, Eric P. Graap, as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Fauquier Bankshares, Inc., certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, which accompanies this certification fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Fauquier Bankshares, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose. The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.
 Dated: May 9, 2011
/s/Eric P. GraapEric P. GraapExecutive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
#### E. A. Bullock, appellant, v. E. H. Buettner, appellee.

Filed May 17, 1913.

No. 17,200.

Appeal: Affirmance. Record examined, and found not to contain any reversible error.

Appeal from the district court for Boyd county: James J. Harrington, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*R. R. Hasten,*for appellant.

*D. A. Harrington, contra.*

Fawcett, . J.

This action was instituted in the county court of Boyd county, to recover the consideration for an alleged sale of a feeder for a threshing machine. There was a trial and judgment for defendant, from which plaintiff appealed. The trial in the district court resulted in a verdict and judgment for defendant, and plaintiff now appeals to this court.

The questions presented are: A ruling of the court permitting an amendment to the answer; the sufficiency of the evidence; and exceptions to instructions. Upon the first point it is sufficient to say that, in order to obtain a review of a ruling of the district court permitting an amendment to a pleading in a case appealed from an inferior court, upon the ground that the amendment changes the issues tried below, the record in this court must show the change in such issues. We have carefully examined the record as to the other two points, and find that it contains no reversible error. The evidence appears to us to be sufficient to sustain the verdict, and no questions of law are discussed, which have not been repeatedly decided by this court. Neither the parties to the action nor the profession would derive any benefit from an extended discussion of the case.

The judgment of the district court is therefore

Affirmed.

Barnes, Sedgwick and Hamer, JJ., not sitting.
#### § 216.42 Photography. [Reserved]
§ 600.1516 Reimbursement opportunities for revoked Vessel Monitoring System type-approval products. ( a ) Subject to the availability of funds, vessel owners may be eligible for reimbursement payments for a replacement EMTU/EMTU-C if: ( 1 ) All eligibility and process requirements specified by NMFS are met as described in NMFS Policy Directive 06-102; and
( 2 ) The replacement type-approved EMTU/EMTU-C is installed on the vessel, and reporting to NMFS Office of Law Enforcement; and
( 3 ) The type-approval for the previously installed EMTU/EMTU-C has been revoked by NMFS; or
( 4 ) NMFS requires the vessel owner to purchase a new EMTU/EMTU-C prior to the end of an existing unit's service life.
( b ) The cap for individual reimbursement payments is subject to change. If this occurs, NMFS Office of Law Enforcement will publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the change.
Your session is about to expire.Resume session

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Welcome.Log inorregisterCOPS OFFICE RESOURCE CENTER

HomeCatalogCartOrders

                    

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                CatalogMatches: 1Offline form Recent Popular Online Print OtherCOPS-W0963Wellness Provider Vetting GuideLaw enforcement is a unique occupation whose members have unique needs. It can be difficult to find mental health and wellness practitioners who clearly understand the nature of the law enforcement profession. As stressors facing law enforcement increase, identifying culturally competent wellness professionals to meet the needs of sworn and nonsworn employees and their families has become a national priority. The FOP Wellness Provider Vetting Guide provides recommended guidelines for identifying and selecting wellness providers for law enforcement professionals and their families. With step-by-step checklists, the guide lists topics for consideration when choosing a provider, program, or wellness product. Not only for the individual officer, this publication will also provide law enforcement agencies and leaders with a path to providing the best services for their personnel.By Fraternal Order of Police Division of Wellness ServicesCategories: Community PartnershipsLanguage: EnglishPublic linkhttps://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter?item=cops-w0963Click here to see the entire catalog.Cart:Download PDFWeb • Feb 2022Search 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 04:41 (UTC-5) in 0.88 secEnterprise Framework 3.21.7.7 • Store Controls 3.3.1.7Survey 500303407 Section 60000560 Rules Hints Inactive
§ 218.10 Specified activity and geographical region. ( a ) Regulations in this subpart apply only to the U.S. Navy (Navy) for the taking of marine mammals that occur in the area described in paragraph (b) of this section and that occur incidental to the activities listed in paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) The taking of marine mammals by the Navy under this subpart may be authorized in a Letter of Authorization (LOA) only if it occurs within the PMSR Training and Testing Study Area. The PMSR Study Area is located adjacent to Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo Counties along the Pacific Coast of Southern California and includes a 36,000-square-mile sea range. The two primary components of the PMSR Complex are Special Use Airspace and the ocean Operating Areas.
( c ) The taking of marine mammals by the Navy is only authorized if it occurs incidental to the Navy conducting training and testing activities, including: ( 1 ) *Training.* ( i ) Air warfare;
( ii ) Electronic warfare; and
( iii ) Surface warfare.
( 2 ) *Testing.* ( i ) Air warfare;
( ii ) Electronic warfare; and
( iii ) Surface warfare.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED SEPTEMBER 30, 2020

NO. 03-19-00259-CV

Appellant, Rodolfo Canales, Jr.// Cross-Appellants, Ken Paxton, in his Official Capacity as 

Attorney General of the State of Texas; and the Office of The Attorney General, in its 

Capacity as the Title IV-D Agency under Part D of the Social Security Act

v.

Appellees, Ken Paxton, in his Official Capacity as Attorney General of the State of Texas; 

and the Office of The Attorney General, in its Capacity as the Title IV-D Agency under 

Part D of the Social Security Act// Cross-Appellee, Rodolfo Canales, Jr.

APPEAL FROM THE 345TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BAKER, AND KELLY

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE KELLY

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on April 19, 2019. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error 

in the judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment. Appellant shall pay all 

costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
#### § 404.1 Scope and purpose.

The regulations in this part codify the provisions of Presidential Proclamation 8031, and govern the administration of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument. These regulations are jointly implemented by the Secretaries of the Interior, through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Commerce, through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Nothing in these regulations shall be deemed to diminish or enlarge the jurisdiction of the State of Hawaii.