alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, *Plaintiff, v.*Merchants’ Bank, *Defendant*.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements, on opinion of

Landon, J.
Exhibit 32.1   Certification of Chief Executive  Officer pursuant to Section 906
               of Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2003

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Long Island Financial Corp., (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Douglas
C. Manditch, President & Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, 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/ Douglas C. Manditch
                                           -----------------------
                                           Douglas C. Manditch
                                           President & Chief Executive Officer
                                           May 17, 2004

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Long Island Financial Corp. and will be retained by Long Island
Financial Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
§ 126.350 Specific tests and inspections. ( a ) The applicable tests and inspections set forth in subpart D of this part must be made during the initial inspection.
( b ) The following specific tests and inspections must also be conducted in the presence of the marine inspector: ( 1 ) Installation of piping for gaseous fixed fire-extinguishing (see § 95.15-15 of this chapter).
( 2 ) Hydraulic steering-systems. If fitted with manual operation, these systems must be tested in the manual mode, with the hydraulic pumps secured, for smooth, efficient operation by one person.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**Section1350 Certification**

Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, the undersigned officer of Nextera Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”)hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

(i)  the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007 (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Act of 1934, as amended; and

(ii) the information contained in the Reportfairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 
| Date: May 15, 2007 |
|--------------------|
|               | By:   /s/  Antonio Rodriquez |   |
|               | Chief Financial Officer |
|               | (Principal Financial Officer) |

 

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated byreference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the datehereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

----
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 15-14083

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 3:14-cr-00073-MJG-JRK-4

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RONDELL SCOTT HEDRICK,

 Defendants-Appellants.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(November 21, 2016)

Before TJOFLAT, JORDAN and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 15-14083 Date Filed: 11/21/2016 Page: 1 of 2 
2

Stephen J. Langs, appointed counsel for Rondell Scott Hedrick in this direct 

criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the 

appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 

1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record 

reveals that counsel=s assessment of the relative merit of Hedrick’s appeal is 

correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable 

issues of merit, counsel=s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Hedrick’s

convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.

Case: 15-14083 Date Filed: 11/21/2016 Page: 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 67 (Monday, April 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 17582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1724]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--ASTM International--Standards

    Notice is hereby given that, on March 13, 2007, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), ASTM International--Standards 
(``ASTM'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing additions 
or changes to its standards development activities. The notifications 
were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting 
the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Specifically, ASTM has provided an updated list of 
current, ongoing ASTM standards activities originating between December 
2006 and February 2007, designated as Work Items. A complete listing of 
ASTM Work Items, along with a brief description of each, is available 
at http://www.astm.org.
    On September 15, 2004, ASTM filed its original notification 
pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of 
the Act on November 10, 2004 (69 FR 65226).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on December 14, 
2006. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3415).
    For additional information, please contact: Thomas B. O'Brien, Jr., 
General Counsel, at 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428, 
telephone 610-832-9597 e-mail address <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3e4a515c4c575b507e5f4d4a5310514c59"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="14607b76667d717a54756760793a7b6673">[email protected]</span></a>.

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 07-1724 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 169.233 Notice and plans required. ( a ) The master, owner, operator, or agent of the vessel shall notify the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, whenever the vessel is to be drydocked regardless of the reason for drydocking.
( b ) Each vessel, except barges, that holds a Load Line Certificate must have on board a plan showing the vessel's scantlings. This plan must be made available to the Coast Guard marine inspector whenever the vessel undergoes a drydock examination or internal structural examination or whenever repairs are made to the vessel's hull.
( c ) Each barge that holds a Load Line Certificate must have a plan showing the barge's scantlings. The plan need not be maintained on board the barge but must be made available to the Coast Guard marine inspector whenever the barge undergoes a drydock examination or internal structural examination or whenever repairs are made to the barge's hull.
[CGD 84-024, 52 FR 39656, Oct. 23, 1987]
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Onyx Acceptance Corporation on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-11453 and 333-67799) of
our report dated January 20, 1999, on our audits of the consolidated financial
statements of Onyx Acceptance Corporation as of December 31, 1998 and 1997 and
for each of the years ended December 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996, which report is
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


                                                 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Los Angeles, California
March 29, 1999
# C_2012049EN.01001501.xml

| 18.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 49/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 49/15

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Karlsruhe (Germany) lodged on 24 November 2011 — Philipp Seeberger v Studentenwerk Heidelberg

(Case C-585/11)

2012/C 49/24

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Karlsruhe

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Claimant: Philipp Seeberger

Claimant:

Defendant: Studentenwerk Heidelberg

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Does European Union law preclude national legislation which denies an education or training grant for studies in another Member State solely on the ground that the student, who has exercised the right to freedom of movement, has not, at the commencement of the studies, had his permanent residence in his Member State of origin for at least three years? (1)

1

---

(1)  Interpretation of Articles 20 and 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) — Citizenship of the Union and free movement.

1

---
# C_2013079EN.01001402.xml

| 16.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/14

---

Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2013 — Marszałkowski v OHIM — Mar-Ko Fleischwaren (WALICHNOWY MARKO)

(Case T-159/11) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark WALICHNOWY MARKO - Earlier Community word mark MAR-KO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 79/24

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Marek Marszałkowski (Sokolniki, Poland) (represented by: C. Sadkowski, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: K. Zajfert and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Mar-Ko Fleischwaren GmbH & Co. KG (Blankenheim, Germany) (represented by: O. Ruhl, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 January 2011 (Case R 760/2010-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Mar-Ko Fleischwaren GmbH & Co. KG and Mr Marek Marszałkowski.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Marek Marszałkowski to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Marek Marszałkowski to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.

1

---
Editorial Note on Part 154
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 154.650 Cargo tank and process pressure vessel welding. ( a ) Cargo tank and process pressure vessel welding must meet Subpart 54.05 and Part 57 of this chapter.
( b ) Welding consumables used in welding cargo tanks must meet § 57.02-4 of this chapter.
( c ) Independent tanks must meet the following: ( 1 ) Each welded joint of the shells must be a full penetration butt weld, except dome to shell connections may have full penetration tee welds.
( 2 ) Each nozzle weld must be of the full penetration type, except for small penetrations on domes.
( d ) Each welded joint in an independent tank type C or in a process pressure vessel must meet part 54 of this chapter, except that any backing rings must be removed unless specially approved by the Commandant (CG-OES).
( e ) Each welded joint in a membrane tank must meet the quality assurance measures, weld procedure qualification, design details, materials, construction, inspection, and production testing of components developed during the prototype testing program that are specially approved by the Commandant (CG-OES) under this part.
( f ) Each welded joint in a semi-membrane tank must meet paragraph (c) or (e) of this section.
[CGD 74-289, 44 FR 26009, May 3, 1979, as amended by CGD 82-063b, 48 FR 4782, Feb. 3, 1983]
**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 Annual Report of Homeland Security Capital Corporation
      (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, as
      filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      “Report”), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
      hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
      knowledge:




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 operation of the Company.


Date:May
                15, 2007
            By:
            */s/
              Michael T. Brigante*Name:Michael
                T. BriganteTitle:Chief Financial
                Officer
                (Principal
                  Accounting Officer)




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to Homeland Security Capital Corporation
      and
      will be retained by Homeland Security Capital Corporation and furnished to
      the
      U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon request.
§ 140.205 General vessel operation. ( a ) A vessel must be operated in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and in such a manner as to afford protection against hazards to life, property, and the environment.
( b ) Towing vessels with a Towing Safety Management System (TSMS) must be operated in accordance with the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
( c ) Vessels must be manned in accordance with the COI. Manning requirements are contained in part 15 of this chapter.
( d ) Each crewmember that is required to hold a Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC) must have the credential on board and available for examination at all times when the vessel is operating.
( e ) All individuals who are not required to hold an MMC permitted onboard the vessel must have and present on request a valid personal identification that meets the requirements set forth in 33 CFR 101.515.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 135 (Friday, July 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41395-41396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17108]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Science.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Basic Energy Sciences 
Advisory Committee (BESAC). Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be 
announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Thursday, July 26, 2012, 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., and Friday, July 27, 
2012, 9 a.m.-12 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Bethesda North Hotel and Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli 
Road, Bethesda, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie Perine, Office of Basic Energy 
Sciences, U.S. Department of Energy, Germantown Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585; Telephone: (301) 903-
6529.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of this meeting is to provide 
advice and guidance with respect to the basic energy sciences research 
program.
    Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include discussions of the following:

[ssquf] News from Office of Science/DOE
[ssquf] News from the Office of Basic Energy Sciences
[ssquf] Future of ARPA-E
[ssquf] Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) update
[ssquf] Materials Sciences and Engineering Division Committee of 
Visitors Report
[ssquf] Mesoscale Discussion

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you 
would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do 
so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral 
statements regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact 
Katie Perine at (301) 903-6594 (fax) or by email at: 
katie.perine@science.doe.gov. Reasonable provision will be made to 
include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of 
the Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly 
conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting date due to programmatic issues that had to be resolved prior 
to the meeting date.
    Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and

[[Page 41396]]

copying within 45 days from the Committee's Web site at: http://science.energy.gov/bes/besac/.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 9, 2012.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-17108 Filed 7-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN RE MICHAEL RAJIRI EL-JABAZWE

Petitioner

Case No. 14-mc-51004

Hon. Gerald E. Rosen

___________________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING MATTER

Petitioner Michael Rajiri El-Jabazwe has commenced this miscellaneous 

action to “change his family name from ‘El-Jabazwe’ to ‘El-Raneb.’” (Dkt. #1, at 

1). He has done so in order to “reclaim one of his indigenous heritage group of 

family names and reclaim one of his title of nobility affixes pursuant to the 

‘Journal of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

for the Session Begun at Harrisburg on the Third Day of January, 1933, Part IV, 

Resolution 75.’” (Id.). Having reviewed Petitioner’s filing, the Court has 

determined that federal subject matter jurisdiction is lacking. 

The federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction; they have only such 

jurisdiction as is defined by Article III of the United States Constitution and 

granted by Congress. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 

375, 377 (1994); Fisher v. Peters, 249 F.3d 433, 444 (6th Cir. 2001). As provided 

in 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332, federal courts have jurisdiction (1) over civil 

1

2:14-mc-51004-GER-MKM Doc # 2 Filed 08/12/14 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 3
actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States, 28 

U.S.C. § 1331 (“federal question jurisdiction”), and (2) over civil actions between 

completely diverse parties where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or 

value of $75,000, 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (“diversity jurisdiction”). Federal courts have 

a duty to consider their subject matter jurisdiction in regard to every case and may 

raise the issue sua sponte. See In re Lewis, 398 F.3d 735, 739 (6th Cir. 2005). 

Additionally, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) requires the Court to 

dismiss an action if, at any time, it determines it lacks subject matter jurisdiction 

over the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).

Here, Petitioner neither raises a federal cause of action nor asserts a state 

cause of action involving diverse parties that exceeds $75,000. This Court 

therefore lacks subject matter jurisdiction. 

For all of the foregoing reasons, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is dismissed for lack of subject 

matter jurisdiction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 12, 2014 s/Gerald E. Rosen

Chief, Judge, United States District Court

2

2:14-mc-51004-GER-MKM Doc # 2 Filed 08/12/14 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties 

and/or counsel of record on August 12, 2014, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Julie Owens

Case Manager, (313) 234-5135

3

2:14-mc-51004-GER-MKM Doc # 2 Filed 08/12/14 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 5
# C_2011355EN.01003001.xml

| 3.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 355/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 355/30

---

Action brought on 22 July 2011 — ZZ v Court of Justice of the European Union

(Case F-71/11)

2011/C 355/52

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: J.-M. Bauler, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the applicant’s staff report for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2007 and compensation for non-material damage.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the staff report for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2007; in the alternative, annul the note of 9 September 2009 established following the annulment of the previous staff report covering the same period; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the staff report for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2007; in the alternative, annul the note of 9 September 2009 established following the annulment of the previous staff report covering the same period;

| — | annul the decision dismissing the complaint of 14 April 2011; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision dismissing the complaint of 14 April 2011;

| — | order the defendant to pay EUR 50 000 by way of compensation for non-material damage; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay EUR 50 000 by way of compensation for non-material damage;

| — | order the Court of Justice of the European Union to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Court of Justice of the European Union to pay the costs.

---