alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ONE HUNDRED FIRST CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION { 

Convened January 3, 1989 

Adjourned November 22, 1989 

Convened January 23, 1990 

SECOND SESSION { 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Monday, April 2, 1990 

PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF WALTER J.STEWART, 

SECRETARY OF THE SENATE 

By Gerald A. Hackett, Executive Clerk 
1 

NOMINATIONS 

Calendar Message Nominee, Office, And Predecessor Reported 

No. No. Bv 

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 

* 386 576 Clifford R. Oviatt, Jr., of Virginia, to be Oct 4, 89 Mr. Kennedy, 

a Member of the National Labor Relations Committee on Labor and 

Board for the remainder of the term Human Resources, without 

expiring August 27, 1993, vice Wilford W. printed report. 

Johansen, resigned. 

* 389 771 Dennis M. Devaney, of Maryland, to be a Do. 

Member of the National Labor Relations 

Board for the term of five years expiring 

December 16, 1994. (Reappointment) 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

* 601 1029 John Wesley Bartlett, of Massachusetts, to Feb 21, 90 Mr. Johnston, 

be Director of the Office of Civilian Committee on Energy and 

Radioactive Waste Management, vice Ben C. Natural Resources, without 

Rusche, resigned. printed report. 

[NEW REPORTS] 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

681 808 Robert W. Sweet, Jr., of Virginia, to be Mar 30, 90 Mr. Biden, 

Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Committee on the Judiciary, 

Justice and Delinquency Prevention, vice with printed report with 

Verne L. Speirs, resigned. additional views - Ex.Rept. 

101-19. Also with minority 

and supplemental minority 

views. 

*Signifies nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly 

constituted committee of the Senate.
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.                  

###### Consumer Product Safety Commission

      ( print page 61462)    

# Time and Date:

Thursday, October 26, 2006, 10 a.m.

# Place:

Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland. 

# Status:

Open to the Public.

# Matter to Be Considered:

*Portable Generators:*

Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR).

The staff will brief the Commission on issues related to an advance notice of proposed rulemaking for portable generators.

For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, call (301) 504-7948.

# Contact Person for More Information:

Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814 (301) 504-7923.

Dated: October 16, 2006.

Todd A. Stevenson,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 06-8786 Filed 10-16-06; 2:45pm]

BILLING CODE 6355-01-M
§ 901.1 Title and office. ( a ) *Title.* The name of the Corporation is the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation.
( b ) *Office.* The office of the Corporation shall be in the city of Washington, District of Columbia.
# EUR-Lex - 12008E105 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12008E105

**Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - PART THREE: UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS - TITLE VII: COMMON RULES ON COMPETITION, TAXATION AND APPROXIMATION OF LAWS - Chapter 1: Rules on competition - Section 1: Rules applying to undertakings - Article 105 (ex Article 85 TEC) **

*
Official Journal 115 , 09/05/2008 P. 0090 - 0090 *

Article 105

(ex Article 85 TEC)

1. Without prejudice to Article 104, the Commission shall ensure the application of the principles laid down in Articles 101 and 102. On application by a Member State or on its own initiative, and in cooperation with the competent authorities in the Member States, which shall give it their assistance, the Commission shall investigate cases of suspected infringement of these principles. If it finds that there has been an infringement, it shall propose appropriate measures to bring it to an end.

2. If the infringement is not brought to an end, the Commission shall record such infringement of the principles in a reasoned decision. The Commission may publish its decision and authorise Member States to take the measures, the conditions and details of which it shall determine, needed to remedy the situation.

3. The Commission may adopt regulations relating to the categories of agreement in respect of which the Council has adopted a regulation or a directive pursuant to Article 103(2)(b).

--------------------------------------------------
800 Independence Ave., S.W.

Washington, DC 20591

AFS

- 12

- 308

- E November 7, 2012

Mr. Matthew Scribner

Inogen, Inc.

326 Bollay Drive

Goleta, CA 93117

Dear Mr. Scribner :

In your March 28, 2012

, letter

, you petition ed the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) for an exemption from Special Federal Aviation Regulation 1 06 , Section 2 and

Section 3(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations ( 14 CFR) . This exemption would

allow the use of the Inogen , Inc., One G 3 Portable Oxygen Concentrator (POC) as an

approved POC on board commercial aircraft.

The FAA amended SFAR 106 on October 16, 2012 ( 77 FR 63217 ) to add the following

POC devices that may be carried on and used by a passenger on board an aircraft :

• AirSep Focus

• AirSep Freestyle 5

• Inogen One G3

• Inova Labs LifeChoice Activox

• Respironics Simply Go

• Precision Medical E asyPulse

• SeQual SAROS

Therefore, we will take no further action on this petiti on and Docket No. FAA

- 2012

- 0389

is being closed

.

Sincerely,

/s/

Ida M. Klepper

Manager, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
# PAC Table 8c

&"Arial,Bold"&10&KFF0000This table was generated on 8/31/23.
Exhibit 99.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Primus
Knowledge Solutions, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald M. Stevens, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.



|                                                                                              
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    RONALD M. STEVENS                                                                      
|Ronald M. Stevens Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer May 14, 2003
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY-ACT OF 2002



I, Rick Ivanovick, Chief Financial Officer of RecycleNet and subsidiaries, certify that:



1.I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of RecycleNet and subsidiaries.



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.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.The small business issuers other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and



5.The small business issuers other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



|April 30, 2004 | /s/   Rick Ivanovick   
|-------------- | -----------------------
|               | Rick Ivanovick         
|               | Chief Financial Officer
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

 Fact Sheet cops.usdoj.gov

2021 Community Policing Development Program

Community Policing Development (CPD) funds are used to develop the capacity of law enforcement to implement community policing strategies by providing guidance on promising practices through the development and testing of innovative 

strategies; building knowledge about effective practices and outcomes; and supporting new, creative approaches to preventing 

crime and promoting safe communities. The 2021 CPD program funded projects that develop knowledge, increase awareness 

of effective community policing strategies, increase the skills and abilities of law enforcement and community partners, increase 

the number of law enforcement agencies and relevant stakeholders using proven community policing practices, and institutionalize community policing practice in routine business.

COPS Office Community Policing 

Development Awards

The 2021 CPD program funded projects related to the 

following categories and subcategories:

Crisis Intervention Teams

• Implementation of Crisis Intervention Teams

• Crisis Intervention Training Provider

De-Escalation Training

• De-Escalation State, Local, and Tribal Law 

Enforcement Agency Grants

• Regional De-Escalation Training Centers

Accreditation

• Addressing Gaps in State Accreditation

• Enhancing Existing Law Enforcement 

Accreditation Entities

• Supporting Tribal Agency Accreditation

• Supporting Law Enforcement Agencies in 

Seeking Accreditation

Microgrants

• Community Trust and Legitimacy

• Officer Engagement

• Youth Engagement

• Community Violence Intervention

Tolerance, Diversity, and Anti-Bias Online Training

Invitational Applications

The full listing of awarded projects is located on the COPS 

Office website at https://cops.usdoj.gov/cpd.

Funding Provisions

Provisions include the following:

In FY 2021, the COPS Office awarded $31.3 million 

under the CPD program.

Generally, the CPD program was open to all public governmental agencies, for-profit and nonprofit institutions, 

institutions of higher education, community groups, and 

faith-based organizations. Categories and subcategories 

had individual eligibility criteria. Accepted proposals were 

responsive to the category—and, if applicable, subcategory—selected, significantly advanced the field of community policing, and demonstrated an understanding of 

community policing.

Contact the COPS Office

For more information about COPS Office 

programs and resources, please call the COPS 

Office Response Center at 800-421-6770 or visit 

the COPS Office website at https://cops.usdoj.gov.

October 2021
FY21 Community Policing Development Program Map

2

2021 Community Policing Development Program

October 2021
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsProceedings of a Workshop on Antarctic Meteorite Stranding SurfacesThe discovery of large numbers of meteorites on the Antarctic Ice Sheet is one of the most exciting developments in polar science in recent years. The meteorites are found on areas of ice called stranding surfaces. Because of the sudden availability of hundreds, and then thousands, of new meteorite specimens at these sites, the significance of the discovery of meteorite stranding surfaces in Antarctica had an immediate and profound impact on planetary science, but there is also in this discovery an enormous, largely unrealized potential to glaciology for records of climatic and ice sheet changes. The glaciological interest derives from the antiquity of the ice in meteorite stranding surfaces. This exposed ice covers a range of ages, probably between zero and more than 500,000 years. The Workshop on Antarctic Meteorite Stranding Surfaces was convened to explore this potential and to devise a course of action that could be recommended to granting agencies. The workshop recognized three prime functions of meteorite stranding surfaces. They provide: (1) A proxy record of climatic change (i.e., a long record of climatic change is probably preserved in the exposed ice stratigraphy); (2) A proxy record of ice volume change; and (3) A source of unique nonterrestrial material.Document ID19900017423Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference ProceedingsAuthorsCassidy, W. A.*(Lunar and Planetary Inst. Houston, TX, United States)*Whillans, I. M.*(Lunar and Planetary Inst. Houston, TX, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateAugust 3, 1990Subject CategoryAstrophysicsReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-186575NAS 1.26:186575LPI-TR-90-03Accession Number90N26739Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NASW-4066Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900017423.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Exhibit 32.1

SATELLITE SECURITY CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Satellite
Security Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John L. Phillips, Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.



|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  |                        
|------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                    |  |  | 
|Date: July 13, 2006 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ John L. Phillips
|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  | John L. Phillips       
|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  | Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
###### Editorial Note on [Part 1926](/current/title-29/part-1926?toc=1)

#### Editorial Notes:

1. At [44 FR 8577](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-8577), Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at [44 FR 20940](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-20940), Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of [29 CFR part 1926](/on/2024-09-23/title-29/part-1926) together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in [29 CFR part 1910](/on/2024-09-23/title-29/part-1910), which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at [84 FR 21597](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/84-FR-21597), May 14, 2019.

#### § 1926.1147 Ethylene oxide.

Note:

The requirements applicable to construction work under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.1047 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-23/title-29/section-1910.1047).

[[61 FR 31434](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31434), June 20, 1996]
#### George E. Harding, Respondent, *v.*Roman Catholic Church of St. Peter, Appellant.

(Argued May 3, 1907;

decided May 21, 1907.)

*Harding*v. *Roman Catholic Church of St. Peter,*113 App. Div. 685, affirmed.

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered June 26, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for • services alleged to have been rendered.

*Ma/rtin Oonboy*for appellant.

*Mel/oin G. Falliser,*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ. Not voting: O’Brien, J.
Hillsborough,

No. 4753.

#### Albert Levesque *v.*Mary B. Cote.

Argued October 6, 1959.

Decided December 1, 1959.

*299
      *Guertin & Widener (Mr. Guertin*orally), for the plaintiff.

*Albert Terrien*(by brief and orally), for the defendant.

Kenison, C. J.

The findings of fact in this case have not been impeached by either party. The defendant took no exception thereto and the plaintiff in challenging the correctness of the decree denying relief, accepts as true the facts found by the Trial Court. On the findings this is a case where the plaintiff transferred property in j oint tenancy with the understanding that the defendant would live with him in a common-law husband-and-wife relationship. Transfers of property or money based on illicit sexual relations have fared badly in the courts. It “is well settled that where the consideration for the transfer of property or the payment of money by a man to a woman, or by a woman to a man, is future illicit sexual relations between them, or where the purpose of the transfer or payment of money is to encourage such relations, the party so paying money or transferring property cannot recover the same.” Anno. 120 A. L. R. 475.

The cases in this jurisdiction support this rule. In *White*v. *Hunter,*23 N. H. 128, the court refused to allow a son and heir to obtain a reconveyance of realty transferred by his father to a woman in consideration of illicit intercourse. In *Harlow*v. *Leclair,*82 N. H. 506, a man gave a woman money to purchase an automobile, taking a mortgage to secure the payments, and then surrendered the mortgage and note in consideration of past and future illicit sexual relations. It was held that where the woman terminated such relations prior to the time agreed on, the man was not entitled to sue for the amount due on the mortgage thus surrendered to the woman. In *Gauthier*v. *Laing,*96 N. H. 80, recovery was denied for services rendered a deceased where illicit cohabitation of the parties was an inseparable and indivisible part of the bargain.

Since the Court has found that the agreement between the parties did not contemplate that the defendant was to act as housekeeper for the plaintiff, it is impossible to employ the rule *300set forth in *Crossett*v. *Brackett,*79 N. H. 102, *104,*that a bargain for housekeeping services, otherwise valid, is not rendered illegal by the “fact that their illicit relations furnished the motive.” Nor is it possible to find any separate or subsequent agreement between the parties which was distinct from the illegality of their relationship. *Zytka*v. *Dmochowski,*302 Mass. 63; Restatement, Contracts, s. 589.

While the author of this opinion continues to have doubts and misgivings, as indicated in *Gauthier*v. *Laing,*96 N. H. 80, 85, that the general rule employed in our cases is a deterrent to 'sin, a majority of the Court supports the general rule and the public policy which lies behind it. 6 Williston, Contracts (Rev. *ed.) s.*1745. The ruling of the Trial Court denying relief to the plaintiff in this case is similar to and supported by the rationale of *Harlow*v. *Leclair,*82 N. H. 506.

*Exceptions overruled.*

All concurred.