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

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, May 23, 1995 (71), Para 71.9 American Overseas Interests]
[Page 806]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.71.9  american overseas interests

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. GILLMOR, pursuant to House Resolution 155 
and rule XXIII, declared the House resolved into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 1561) to consolidate the foreign affairs agencies of the United 
States; to authorize appropriations for the Department of State and 
related agencies for fiscal years 1996 and 1997; to responsibly reduce 
the authorizations of appropriations for United States foreign 
assistance programs for fiscal years 1996 and 1997, and for other 
purposes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. GILLMOR, by unanimous consent, designated 
Mr. GOODLATTE as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole; and after some 
time spent therein,
  The Committee rose informally to receive a message from the President.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. BURTON, assumed the Chair.
```
#### Alester Vadney, *Respondent, v.*Henry A. Person, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Boardman, J.
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 5
Federal Reserve Bank of: Richmond

## Filings received during the week ending November 16, 2013

|Filer                        | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 | End of Comment Period                             
|---------------------------- | ------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------
|CAPGEN CAPITAL GROUP III LLC | * 3A3         | CapGen Capital Group III LLC and CapGen Capital Group III LP, both of New York, New York, to increase their investment up to 25% of the outstanding common stock of Seacoast Banking Corporation of Florida, Stuart, Florida, and thereby increase their investment in Seacoast National Bank, Stuart, Florida. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:12/12/2013
|Newspaper:                   | Not available
|Federal Register:            | 12/12/2013   

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location                | RSSDID  | Exam Date  | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|------------------------------------- | ------- | ---------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|BANK OF MARION, MARION, VIRGINIA      | 858528  | 07/15/2013 | 11/03/2013     | S         | Large Bank 
|BCBANK, PHILIPPI, WEST VIRGINIA       | 829032  | 06/03/2013 | 10/31/2013     | S         | Small Bank 
|MAINSTREET BK, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA      | 3248849 | 07/29/2013 | 11/04/2013     | S         | Small Bank 
|UNITED BK, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA          | 365325  | 06/03/2013 | 11/07/2013     | S         | Large Bank 
|UNITED BK, PARKERSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA | 1010930 | 06/03/2013 | 11/07/2013     | S         | Large Bank 

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
#### Arnold J. D. Wedemeyer, *Respondent, v.*William F. Redlich, *Appellant.*

Judgment reversed, new trial granted, costs to appellant to a&ide event. Opinion by

Davis, P. J.
Editorial Note on Part 192
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 192 appear at 71 FR 33406, June 9, 2006.

§ 192.243 Nondestructive testing. ( a ) Nondestructive testing of welds must be performed by any process, other than trepanning, that will clearly indicate defects that may affect the integrity of the weld.
( b ) Nondestructive testing of welds must be performed: ( 1 ) In accordance with written procedures; and
( 2 ) By persons who have been trained and qualified in the established procedures and with the equipment employed in testing.
( c ) Procedures must be established for the proper interpretation of each nondestructive test of a weld to ensure the acceptability of the weld under § 192.241(c).
( d ) When nondestructive testing is required under § 192.241(b), the following percentages of each day's field butt welds, selected at random by the operator, must be nondestructively tested over their entire circumference: ( 1 ) In Class 1 locations, except offshore, at least 10 percent.
( 2 ) In Class 2 locations, at least 15 percent.
( 3 ) In Class 3 and Class 4 locations, at crossings of major or navigable rivers, offshore, and within railroad or public highway rights-of-way, including tunnels, bridges, and overhead road crossings, 100 percent unless impracticable, in which case at least 90 percent. Nondestructive testing must be impracticable for each girth weld not tested.
( 4 ) At pipeline tie-ins, including tie-ins of replacement sections, 100 percent.
( e ) Except for a welder or welding operator whose work is isolated from the principal welding activity, a sample of each welder or welding operator's work for each day must be nondestructively tested, when nondestructive testing is required under § 192.241(b).
( f ) When nondestructive testing is required under § 192.241(b), each operator must retain, for the life of the pipeline, a record showing by milepost, engineering station, or by geographic feature, the number of girth welds made, the number nondestructively tested, the number rejected, and the disposition of the rejects.
[35 FR 13257, Aug. 19, 1970, as amended by Amdt. 192-27, 41 FR 34606, Aug. 16, 1976; Amdt. 192-50, 50 FR 37192, Sept. 12, 1985; Amdt. 192-78, 61 FR 28784, June 6, 1996; Amdt. 192-120, 80 FR 12779, Mar. 11, 2015]
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2012 - 0342 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2011 - SW - 028 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
-----Original Message----- 

From: mccallmj@gci.net [mailto:mccallmj@gci.net] 

Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 7:48 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 24, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Mary Jean McCall 

7341 Huntsmen Circle #A 

ANchorage, AK 99518
Exhibit 99.1

                            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 Repro-Med Systems, Inc., on Form
10-QSB for the period ending November 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Andrew Sealfon, 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:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

/s/Andrew I. Sealfon
Andrew I. Sealfon, President, Treasurer,
Chairman of the Board, Director, and Chief Executive Officer
-----Original Message----- 

From: AKGMOL@YAHOO.COM [mailto:AKGMOL@YAHOO.COM] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 9:45 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Anne Molinas 

4150 NW 90TH Ave Apt 106 

Coral Springs, FL 33065
#### Farmers Co-operative Company, appellee, v. Hilma H. Louis, appellant.

Filed December 14, 1918.

No. 20250.

Evidence examined, and found sufficient to sustain the verdict.

Appeal from the district court for Saunders county: George F. Corcoran, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*816
      *Charles H. Slama,*for appellant.

*Joe F. Berggren, contra.*

Morrissey, C. J.

On trial to a jury, plaintiff recovered judgment for a bill of lumber used in tbe construction of a building on real estate owned by defendant, and defendant appeals.

Defendant is a married woman, but holds the real estate in her own right. O. O. Louis, the husband, ordered the lumber. Plaintiff made entry on its books in the following form:

> “Sold O. O. Louis, Swedeburg, Nebr.

> “For Hilma H. Louis property.’

Plaintiff alleges that the sale was made to defendant. Defendant denies that she ordered or purchased the lumber, although it is not denied that it was used in the erection of her building.

The court submitted the question to the jury, upon the evidence, whether the goods were in fact sold to the husband or to the wife, and the jury found for the plaintiff. The instruction is not objected to, and that is decisive of that question.

Defendant says in her brief that the only question for us to determine is: Was the charge, as made on the books of the company, made against her, or was it intended to be a charge against her husband? An inspection of the original entry, which is in evidence, may leave the question somewhat in doubt; but the manager of the company testified, without objection, that the goods were charged to defendant, “because I knew the property was in her name.” This testimony is uncontradicted, and is sufficient to sustain the verdict on the point presented.

The judgment is

Affirmed.

Letton and Rose, JJ., not sitting.
-----Original Message----- 

From: herriphil@mchsi.com [mailto:herriphil@mchsi.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 4:12 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Jennifer Herrington 

619 N 12th St 

Clarinda, IA 51632
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2161 Engrossed in House (EH)]

    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2161

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To extend authorities under the Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 
          1994 until October 1, 1995, and for other purposes.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES.

    (a) In General.--Section 583(a) of the Foreign Relations 
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 
(Public Law 103-236), as amended by Public Law 104-17, is amended by 
striking ``August 15, 1995,'' and inserting ``October 1, 1995,''.
    (b) Consultation.--For purposes of any exercise of the authority 
provided in section 583(a) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, 
Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236) prior to August 16, 
1995, the written policy justification dated June 1, 1995, and 
submitted to the Congress in accordance with section 583(b)(1) of such 
Act, and the consultations associated with such policy justification, 
shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of section 583(b)(1) of 
such Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives August 2, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
104th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H.R. 2161

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To extend authorities under the Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 
          1994 until October 1, 1995, and for other purposes.
```
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1607

To provide for the conveyance of El Toro Marine Corps Air Station, selected

for closure under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of

1990, to Orange County, California.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 10, 1995

Mr. ROYCE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on National Security

A BILL

To provide for the conveyance of El Toro Marine Corps

Air Station, selected for closure under the Defense Base

Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, to Orange County, California.

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

3 SECTION 1. LAND CONVEYANCE, EL TORO MARINE CORPS

4 AIR STATION, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

5 (a) CONVEYANCE REQUIRED.—Notwithstanding sec6 tion 2905 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment

7 Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101–

8 510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) governing the disposal of prop-
2

•HR 1607 IH

1 erty at military installations to be closed under that Act,

2 the Secretary of Defense shall convey to Orange County,

3 California, all right, title, and interest of the United States

4 in and to the real property and facilities of El Toro Marine

5 Corps Air Station, California.

6 (b) TIME FOR CONVEYANCE.—The Secretary shall

7 complete the conveyance required by subsection (a) not

8 later than the date of the closure of El Toro Marine Corps

9 Air Station.

10 (c) CONSIDERATION.—The conveyance required by

11 subsection (a) shall be made without consideration.

12 (d) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY.—The exact acreage

13 and legal description of the property to be conveyed under

14 subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory

15 to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne

16 by the Secretary.

17 (e) ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION.—Section

18 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

19 Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C.

20 9620(h)) shall apply to the conveyance of property under

21 subsection (a).

Æ
#### Jake Johnson v. The State.

*No. 665.*

*Decided February 6.*

*1.*Former Conviction—Instructions to Jury.—Where appellant interposed a plea of “former conviction,” and the record fails to disclose any evidence in support of the plea, *Held,*it was not the duty of the court to submit the plea to the jury.

*2.*Juror—Qualifications of.—The fact that one of the jurors who tried this case was a member of the grand jury which presented a bill charging appellant with a similar offense, but not the same ipso facto, does not disqualify the juror.

Appeal from the County Court of Tarrant. Tried below before Hon. Robert G. Johnson, County Judge.

Appellant was convicted upon an indictment for playing at a game of cards in a public place, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $10.

*W. Gregg,*for appellant.

*Mann Trice,*Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

HESDERSOR, Judge.

Conviction for playing cards in a public place. Appellant interposed a plea of former conviction. There is no evidence in the record. We are not aware whether there was any evidence adduced upon the trial in support of the plea. If there was not, it was not the duty of the court to submit the plea to the jury, and hence no error in the jury not finding upon the plea.

The motion for continuance can not be considered in the absence of the facts.

The fact that one of the jurors who tried the case was on the grand jury which presented a bill charging appellant with a similar offense to this, but not the same ipso facto, does not disqualify the juror. The transactions may have been distinct.

The judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*

Judges all present and concurring.
§ 71.25-50 Inspector not limited. ( a ) Nothing in this subpart shall be construed as limiting the inspector from making such tests or inspections as he deems necessary to be assured of the safety and seaworthiness of the vessel.
( b ) [Reserved]
SERVED: APRIL 8, 2011 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

•i^ARTMENTOF 

:;-J ASPORTATION 

:A.ET OPERATIONS 

m ! ! A 10: 22 

IN THE MATTER OF 

BRIAN WALLAESA 

FAA DOCKET NO. CPIOWPOOIO 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2010-0628 

ORDER OF CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE 

In view of the impending prospective lapse in FY2011 appropriations funding government operations as of April 8, 2011, the Department has directed that all employees in the Office 

of Hearings will be furloughed in the event of such a lapse. Accordingly, in the event of such a 

lapse, the Office of Hearings will close on Friday, April 8, 2011, for the duration of the shutdown. 

Any deadline, whether set by regulation or previous order, is suspended and extended for 

the duration of the shutdown. 

SO ORDERED. 

bonnie A. Yode: 

Chief Administrative L 

Attachment - Service List 
'•.4*' 

CORRECTED 

ORI 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, 

Wilbur Wright Building 

Brian Wallaesa, Respondent 

11272 Wortham Crest Circle 

Manassas, VA 20109 

TEL: 570-778-1335 

,FAA Docket Nf. (SPIOWPOOIO 

(Civil Penalty ^on ) 

Johii C. Stuart, Jr., Complainant's CounM,%^ 

Attomey,jQ'ffice of the Chief Counsel \ ', 

Enforcenient Division, AGC-300 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. < 

Washington, DC 20591 

TEL:' 202-267-9958 

FAX: 202-267-5106 

f ^ J.M-, 

-.-i- .• 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder, Chief AdMi^ 

U.S. Department of Transportation j ^ 

Office of Hearings, M-20, Room E12-34) 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. j oV ,^s 

Washington, DC 20590 j nV^^^. 

TEL: 202-366-2142 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Judge 

•xii^ \b'. rf -Si -

u *-

\ u r 

rnor-. - ' 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in pi 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Aveii^l 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AQC'4 

^ , use the follow 

Sliding - Suite^2\ 

Federal 

}, Washington, 

»-•? "" -
##### 



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Superconductive Components, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this annual 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13(a)-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer
and have:
     5.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) 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 small business issuers
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
    /s/ Daniel RooneyDaniel RooneyPresident and Chief Executive Officer