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

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The ACRS Subcommittee on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena will hold a meeting on April 19-20, 2007, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland in Room T-2B3. 

The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of portions that may be closed to discuss General Electric proprietary information pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4). 

The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:

*Thursday, April 19, 2007—8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business.*

*Friday, April 20, 2007—8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business.*

The Subcommittee will review the staff evaluation of the MELLLA+, GE Methods, and GE DSS-CD Topical Reports. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. 

Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Ralph Caruso (Telephone: 301-415-8065) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. 

Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. 

Dated: March 27, 2007. 

Cayetano Santos, 

Acting Branch Chief, ACRS.

[FR Doc. E7-6077 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-20872 USDC No. H-95-CV-4012 (H-90-CR-25-1)

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus FRANK EUGENE MURRY, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

- - - - - - - - - - February 2, 1996 Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * This case is here on a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. Murry filed this motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to set aside his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, arguing that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional because Congress exceeded its authority under the Commerce Clause. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no issue of arguable merit.No. 95-20872 -2- Accordingly, we deny IFP and dismiss the appeal as frivolous. 28

U.S.C. § 1915(a); Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Murry that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Murry is further cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous because they have been previously decided by this court. IFP DENIED, APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v JERRY G. WILLIAMS, Airman Basic, U. S. Air Force, Appellant

15 USCMA 270, 35 CMR 242

No. 18,324

February 26, 1965

*Colonel Robert 0. Rollman*and *Lieutenant Colonel Andrew S. Horton*were on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Colonel Emanuel Lewis*and *Major Thomas J. Connolly*were on the brief for Appellee, United States.

*271Opinion of the Court

FERGUSON, Judge:

This case involves the validity of the same Office of Special Investigations directive involved in United States v Enloe, 15 USCMA 256, 35 CMR 228, United States v Beck, 15 USCMA 269, 35 CMR 241, and United States v Meyer, 15 USCMA 268, 35 CMR 240, the provisions of which were interposed prior to accused’s trial in order to prevent a private interview between its agents and defense counsel. For the reasons set forth in the cited cases, we find error present which is prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused.

In light of our action, the motion by appellate defense counsel to file a brief regarding one of the issues relating to this question is denied.

The decision of the board of review is reversed, and the record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Air Force. A rehearing may be ordered.

Judge Kilday concurs.

Quinn, Chief Judge

(dissenting):

I would affirm the decision of the board of review. See my dissent in United States v Enloe, 15 USCMA 256, 35 CMR 228.
Before the Third Division,

October 27, 1949

No. 53662.

protests 8208-K, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### M. Furuya Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the-authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
#### S. MARTIN JACOBSEN, RESPONDENT, v. PETER A. PETERSON, APPELLANT.

Argued November 22, 1918

Decided November 26, 1918.

On appeal from the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 91 *N. J. L.*404.

For the respondent, *Leo Goldberg er*and *S. Martin Jacobsen.*

Por the appellant, *Peter A. Peterson.*

*632Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Trenchard in the Supreme Court.

• *For affirmance*— The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Parker, Bergen, Kalisch, Black, White, Heppenheimer, Taylor, Gardner, JJ. 10.

*For reversal*— None.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION 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 The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge:



| | (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 Frontier Fund.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                            
|Robert J. Enck                                                                                                
|President and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of The Frontier Fund
|                                                                                                              
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                               
|Brent Bales                                                                                                   
|Chief Financial Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of The Frontier Fund              

Date: November 11, 2010
No. 56504.

protests 176225-K, etc. (New York).

#### Anglo American Fur Merchants Corp. (Transferee) et al. *v.*United States,

*433Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
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 Equal Energy Ltd. on Form 10K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Wendell Chapman, Chief Financial Officer of Equal Energy Ltd., certify, 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; and




(2)


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


/s/Wendell Chapman

Wendell Chapman

Senior Vice President Finance and Chief Financial Officer

of Equal Energy Ltd.




March 14, 2013
#### Veenkant v State Bar Grievance Board.

(Docket No. 59772.)

Boyd Veenkant, *in propria persona,*petitioner. *Louis Rosenzweig*for respondent.

Complaint for writ of mandamus dismissed.

*Michael Franck,*Executive Director, and *Douglas Sweet,*Director of Research and Development, State Bar of Michigan.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket No. RP06-147-004] 

Take notice that on January 5, 2007, Wyoming Interstate Company (WIC) submitted a compliance filing pursuant to the Commission's November 2, 2006 order issued in Docket Nos. RP06-147-002 and 003. 

WIC states that copies of the filing were served on parties on the official service list in the above-captioned proceeding. 

Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding. 

                    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at                     *http://www.ferc.gov.*                     Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.                 

                    This filing is accessible on-line at                     *http://www.ferc.gov,*                     using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,*                     or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                 

Magalie R. Salas, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E7-571 Filed 1-17-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 19

- 20453 Conference Calendar

**United States of America,**
Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus
**Claudia Piedra,**
Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:18

- CR

- 258

- 1

Before **Graves, Willett,** and **Duncan,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *

The attorney appointed to represent Claudia Piedra has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Piedra has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 29, 2021 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-20453 Document: 00515918505 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/29/2021No. 19

- 20453

2 relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the **APPEAL IS DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 19-20453 Document: 00515918505 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/29/2021
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Peter Nardone, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 1013]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered November 14, 1994, convicting him of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf, People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mangano, P. J., Miller, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.
**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 Greenhouse Solutions Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Natalya Lastovka, Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

 

(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/ Natalya Lastovka                                                      

Natalya Lastovka

Chief Financial Officer

 

Dated: May 13, 2011

 

 

----
No. 59088.

protest 238848-K (New York).

#### Gehrig, Hoban & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

From an examination of the papers in this case, the court found nothing therein which tended in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the decision of the collector. The protest was therefore overruled.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Holly B. Mydland, Respondent. North Shore Equestrian Center, Inc., Appellant; John E. Sweeney, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[633 NYS2d 636]

—Mercure, J. P.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 29, 1994, which assessed North Shore Equestrian Center, Inc. for additional unemployment insurance contributions.

North Shore Equestrian Center, Inc. (hereinafter NSEC) operates a stable for the purposes of boarding horses and giving riding lessons. At some point in 1990, claimant applied for work as a riding instructor at NSEC in response to a newspaper advertisement, and worked there for about one year. Claimant was interviewed by NSEC’s president in order to find out whether her work history and riding expertise met NSEC’s criteria. Before claimant started giving lessons, she was provided with an information sheet which stated NSEC’s hours and fees. Claimant was expected to give riding lessons as scheduled by NSEC and also attend bimonthly meetings which dealt with, *inter alia,*instructional methods. Claimant worked only for NSEC. NSEC collected all fees from students and paid *748claimant a certain percentage of the fees, depending on whether the horses used for the lessons were supplied by NSEC. In order to be paid, claimant was required to submit a bill detailing the classes and customers covered. Claimant was also required to give notice when she was ill and unable to meet her scheduled appointments.

Subsequently, after claimant’s clientele decreased, she was finally told by NSEC that her services were no longer needed. Following the cessation of a job claimant had with a separate employer, claimant applied for unemployment insurance benefits and NSEC was assessed for additional unemployment insurance contributions. Arguing that claimant was an independent contractor, NSEC objected to the award of benefits. Following a hearing, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ultimately found that claimant was NSEC’s employee. This appeal by NSEC ensued.

We affirm. It is well settled that "[w]hether an employment relationship exists necessarily is a question of fact” *(Matter of Villa Maria Inst. [Ross],*54 NY2d 691, 692), and the Board’s "resolution of the issue must be upheld if there is substantial evidence to support it” *(Matter of Upgrade Educ. Servs. [Roberts],*89 AD2d 637, *lv denied*57 NY2d 609). While NSEC correctly points out that there were factors presented which could have supported a contrary determination, there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Board’s conclusion that NSEC exercised sufficient overall control over the services of claimant, and all others similarly situated, to establish their status as employees *(see, Matter of Clorfeine [New York Open Ctr.—Hudacs],*187 AD2d 840; *Matter of Educaid, Inc. [Hartnett],*176 AD2d 420, *lv denied*79 NY2d 751; *Matter of Eastern Suffolk School [Roberts],*91 AD2d 1123, *lv denied*60 NY2d 554).

White, Casey, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
##### 



EXHIBIT 21.1 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES JURISDICTION OFSUBSIDIARY
    
    FORMATIONKnowles Europe
    
    United KingdomKnowles Electronics Japan, K.K.
    
    JapanKnowles Electronics (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.
    
    MalaysiaKnowles Electronics Suzhou Co. Ltd.
    
    ChinaKnowles Electronics Taiwan, Ltd.
    
    TaiwanKnowles Manufacturing Ltd.
    
    U.S.  DelawareKnowles Electronics France
    
    FranceRuf Electronics G.M.B.H.
    
    GermanyKnowles Electronics (Weifang) Co. Ltd.
    
    ChinaKnowles Electronics Singapore Pte. Ltd.
    
    SingaporeKnowles Electronics Germany GmbH
    
    GermanyKnowles IPC (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.
    
    MalaysiaKnowles Intermediate Holding Inc.
    
    U.S.  DelawareKnowles Electronics, LLC
    
    U.S.  DelawareEmkay Innovative Products, Inc.
    
    U.S.  Delaware
 28
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8551 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8551

 To require the Director of National Intelligence to prepare and make 
    available a report on the wealth and corrupt activities of the 
   leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 2024

 Mr. Ogles (for himself, Mr. Donalds, Mr. Perry, Mr. Moore of Alabama, 
 Mr. Tiffany, Mr. Lawler, Mr. Bishop of North Carolina, Ms. Van Duyne, 
   Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, Mr. Burlison, and Mr. 
  McCormick) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require the Director of National Intelligence to prepare and make 
    available a report on the wealth and corrupt activities of the 
   leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Confronting CCP Malign Influence 
Act''.

SEC. 2. REPORT ON WEALTH AND CORRUPT ACTIVITIES OF THE LEADERSHIP OF 
              THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence, in 
consultation with the Secretary of State, shall prepare and make 
available to the public an unclassified report on the wealth and 
corrupt activities of the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, 
including the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party and 
senior leadership officials in the Central Committee, the Politburo, 
the Politburo Standing Committee, and any other regional Party 
Secretaries.
    (b) Hearing Requirement.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
the enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence, or 
the Director's designee, shall appear before the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and the 
Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate to present testimony in 
an open hearing regarding the findings of the report required under 
subsection (a).
                                 <all>
```