alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Sherman Henry FOSTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. DD-403 and DD-474.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 27, 1977.

Richard W. Erwin, III, Public Defender, Michael M. Corin and Theodore E. Mack, Asst. Public Defenders, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Richard W. Prospect, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

McCORD, C. J. and RAWLS, J., concur.

SMITH, J., specially concurs.

SMITH, Judge,

concurring:

Foster asserts that his speedy trial rights under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.191 were violated by the State’s failure to retry him within 90 days after entry of a United States district court judgment granting his petition for habeas corpus and remanding him to state authorities. Subsection (g) of the rule provides in part:

> “A person who is to be tried again shall be brought to trial within 90 days from . the date of receipt by the trial court of a mandate, order, or notice of whatever form from an appellate or other reviewing court which makes possible a new trial for the defendant . . ..”

While in my view a judgment in habeas corpus of a United States district court is “a mandate, order, or notice” of a “reviewing court which makes possible a new trial for the defendant,” within the meaning and application of the rule, the event which commences the time for new trial is not its entry but its receipt by the trial court. Verbal or other informal notice to the trial judge does not, under the rule, commence the period for retrial. Foster’s motion for discharge under the rule was therefore properly denied, but without prejudice to any claim for discharge he might have made on the principles of *Barker v. Wingo,*407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972). See *State ex rel. Gentry v. Fitzpatrick,*327 So.2d 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). I concur in the judgment.
109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1181

AN ACT

To ensure an open and deliberate process in Congress by

providing that any future legislation to establish a new

exemption to section 552 of title 5, United States Code

(commonly referred to as the Freedom of Information

Act) be stated explicitly within the text of the bill.

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

2

S 1181 ES

1 SECTION 1. SPECIFIC CITATIONS IN EXEMPTIONS.

2 Section 552(b) of title 5, United States Code, is

3 amended by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the fol4 lowing:

5 ‘‘(3) specifically exempted from disclosure by

6 statute (other than section 552b of this title), pro7 vided that such statute—

8 ‘‘(A) if enacted after July 1, 2005, specifi9 cally cites to this section; and

10 ‘‘(B)(i) requires that the matters be with11 held from the public in such a manner as to

12 leave no discretion on the issue; or

13 ‘‘(ii) establishes particular criteria for

14 withholding or refers to particular types of mat15 ters to be withheld;’’.

Passed the Senate June 24, 2005.

Attest:

Secretary.
109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1181

AN ACT

To ensure an open and deliberate process in Conplicitly within the text of the bill. the Freedom of Information Act) be stated ex- 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as establish a new exemption to section 552 of title gress by providing that any future legislation to
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 28, 1996 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 28, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-28-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1996
<CASH>                                           1,957
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  149,521
<ALLOWANCES>                                    13,279
<INVENTORY>                                     82,306
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               255,938
<PP&E>                                         158,374
<DEPRECIATION>                                  75,654
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 624,578
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          148,745
<BONDS>                                        207,456
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,428
<OTHER-SE>                                     241,853
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   624,578
<SALES>                                        675,417
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               675,417
<CGS>                                          449,629
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  449,629
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               262,950
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,687
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (51,749)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (11,371)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (40,378)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.89)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.89)
        

</TABLE>
#### Royal Hickman Industries *v.*United States

No. 7916.

Entry No. 15.

(Decided December 6, 1950)

*Kefauver, Duggan & Miller (Ben O. Duggan*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General *(John J. Antus,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

The merchandise covered by this appeal for a reappraisement consists of certain electrical key sockets exported from Mexico.

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the market ■value or price at the time of exportation of said merchandise at which .•such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers for home consumption in the principal markets of the country .from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ■ordinary course of trade, including the cost of all containers and ■coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, is Mex. $1 each, net, packed, and *468that tbere was no higher export value for the merchandise herein at the time of exportation to the United States.

Upon the agreed facts, I find the foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (c)), as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for determining the value of said merchandise, and that such value is Mex. $1 each, net, packed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following registration statements of Echo Bay Mines Ltd. and in the related prospectuses of our Report
and Comments by Auditors for U.S. Readers on CanadaU.S. Reporting Difference dated January 31, 2001, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year
ended December 31, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Echo Bay Mines Ltd., as amended, included in this Form 10-K/A.

|Edmonton, Canada
February 13, 2002 |  | /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Chartered Accountants
|---------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------



QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 42130]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20585]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Formations of, Acquisitions by, 
and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies; Correction

    This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. 97-19675) published on page 
40088 of the issue for Friday, July 25, 1997.
    Under the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis heading, the entry 
for BCB Bancorp, Inc., Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, is revised to read as 
follows:
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Karen L. Grandstrand, Vice 
President) 250 Marquette Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-2171:
    1. Northwest Wisconsin Bancorp, Inc., and its wholly-owned 
subsidiary, BCB Bancorp, Inc., both of Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin; to 
engage de novo through their subsidiary, Heartland Data Center, Inc., 
Cameron, Wisconsin, in providing data processing services to local, 
non-affiliate financial institutions, pursuant to Sec.  225.28(b)(14) 
of the Board's Regulation Y.
    Comments on this application must be received by August 11, 1997.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 31, 1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-20585 Filed 8-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2308 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2308

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on yarn of combed cashmere 
                         or yarn of camel hair.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 19, 2012

 Mr. Lieberman introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on yarn of combed cashmere 
                         or yarn of camel hair.

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

SECTION 1. YARN OF COMBED CASHMERE OR YARN OF CAMEL HAIR.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.03.01 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to yarn of combed cashmere or 
yarn of camel hair) is amended by striking the date in the effective 
period column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));                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/ ROBERT                T. FABER |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|   | Robert                  T. Faber*President                and Chief Executive Officer and**Chief                Financial Officer* |

----
<PAGE>

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 Franklin Wireless Corp. (the
"COMPANY") on Form 10-K for the year ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"), I, OC Kim,
Acting Chief Financial Officer 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/ OC KIM

------------------------------
OC Kim
Acting Chief Financial Officer
April 2, 2009
No. 99-7823.

#### Jackson *v.*Massachusetts.

Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

The undersigned Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of AMC
Entertainment Inc. (the "Company"), each hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

Dated:
June 27, 2006

|/s/PETER C. BROWNPeter C. Brown
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive
Officer and President |  | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/CRAIG R. RAMSEYCraig R. Ramsey
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer       |  | 

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to AMC Entertainment Inc. and will be retained by AMC
Entertainment Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]

---



QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 154 (Monday, August 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 43018]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21167]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice (97-108)]


Notice of Prospective Patent License

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of prospective patent license.

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

SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice that UE Systems, Inc., Elmsford, New 
York, has applied for an exclusive license for the patent application 
entitled ``Ultrasonic Imaging System,'' KSC-11909, which is assigned to 
the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Written objections to 
the prospective grant of a license to UE Systems, Inc. should be sent 
to Beth Vrioni, John F. Kennedy Space Center, Mail Code DE-TPO, Kennedy 
Space Center, FL 32899.

DATES: Responses to this notice must be received by October 10, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Beth Vrioni at (407) 867-2544.

    Dated: August 4, 1997.
Edward A. Frankle,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 97-21167 Filed 8-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-M
II 

Calendar No. 147 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1206 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

4960 West Washington Boulevard in Los Angeles, California, as the 

‘‘Ray Charles Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 9, 2005 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. BOXER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

JUNE 29, 2005 

Committee discharged and ordered to be placed on the calendar 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 4960 West Washington Boulevard in Los Angeles, California, as the ‘‘Ray Charles Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 4960 West Washington Boulevard in Los Ange-
2 

S 1206 PCS 

1 les, California, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ray 

2 Charles Post Office Building’’. 

3 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

4 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

5 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

6 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

7 to the ‘‘Ray Charles Post Office Building’’. 

Calendar No. 147 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1206 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Post-

‘‘Ray Charles Post Office Building’’. Boulevard in Los Angeles, California, as the al Service located at 4960 West Washington 

JUNE 29, 2005 

Committee discharged and ordered to be placed on the 

calendar
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

MESA AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO.; CP09SW0002 

(CIVIL PENALTY CASE) 

DMS FAA-2009-0279 

DECEIVED 

^ ^ f i 2011 

t6ARlNG3)0GKeT 

- T l 

r n 

V 

—ic •rx) y 

rn-O m 

c7i 

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT 

An Order On Status of Case (the "Order") was issued on January 3, 2011 directing the parties to notify 

the Court regarding the status of pending settlement discussions. The following Notice of Settlement is 

offered in satisfaction of the Order. The parties have agreed upon settlement terms which will be 

finalized in the claims administration procedures of Mesa's Bankruptcy case pending in the United States 

Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Mesa Air Group, Inc. et al., Case No.: 10-

10018 (MG)). 

Respectfi d this 25* day of January 2011 

ChristO|^her^. Pappaioanou 

V.P. Legal Affairs 

Mesa Air Group, Inc. 

Attachment(s) - Service List 
r 

t 

FAA Docket No. CP09SW0002 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

ONE COPY 

Annjenet Chennault, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Southwest Region, ASW-7E4, AC 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2601 MeachamBlvd 

Fort Work, TX 76137 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

US Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

East Building Ground Floor, Room E-12-320 

Washington, DC 20590
Exhibit 32.1 - SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION


                        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 Absolute Glass Protection, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report").
I, John Dean Harper, Chairman and President of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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/ John Dean Harper
----------------------------
    John Dean Harper
    Chairman and President


Date  February 20, 2003
      -----------------



<PAGE>
### Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under EO12866/13563 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Proposed Rule

Determination for Certain Emission Units in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector

RIN 2060-AS06

General Comments

1. Reviewer recommends providing a description of the impacts of the options in the source determination, including the potential impacts of the permitting process. The reviewer notes that permitting production activities takes place across several levels of local, state, and federal compliance and these permits may be specific to one or several potential new

sources.

Specific Comments:

Typographical Comments: 1. Page 18. Reviewer recommends revising the following sentence to state:

a. Congress specified this whether or not the units are in a contiguous area or under common control. 2. Page 22. Revie wer recommends revising the following sentence to state:

a. In addition, the EPA determined that they were contiguous and adjacent because of the functional interrelatedness of the operations. 3. Page 25. Reviewer recommends revising the following sentence to state:

a. Major source BACT or LAER controls are intended to be continually improving; permitting authorities must assess and sources must install the best technology at the time a permit is issued, instead of what was the best the last time a NSPS or NESHAP was updated. 4. Page 24, footnote 12. Reviewer recommends revising the following sentence to state:

a. We note that the EPA has also announced its plans to conduct a separate action to revise the Regional Consistency Regulations to allow an exception for addres s consistency issues resulting from judicial decisions. 5. Page 25. Reviewer recommends revising the following sentence to state:

a. In addition, if the source is locating located in an area that is designated nonattainment, emissions reductions, known as offsets, may be required in higher ratios to compensate for the proposed emissions increase.
6. Page 30. Reviewer recommends revising the section title to state:

a. What are the options are the that EPA is considering? 7. Page 32. Reviewer recommends revising the following sentence to state:

a. The EPA is proposing to adopt a distance of 1⁄4 mile but is asking for comment on whether another distance , such as 1⁄2 mile, is an appropriate distance to consider for defining a single source even if on separate surface sites (i. e., operations beyond that distance would not be considered for aggregation).
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 T.H. Lehman & Co., Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gary Poe, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, 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) of 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: June 25, 2004By:
/s/ Gary PoeGary PoePrincipal Financial Officerand Secretary