alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 181 (Thursday, September 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 49032]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24801]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Materials Research; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463 as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name and Committee Code: Special Emphasis Panel in Materials 
Research #1203.
    Dates and Times: October 5, 1997, 7:00 pm-10:00 pm and October 
6-7, 1997, 8:00 am-5:00 pm.
    Place: University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. W. Lance Haworth, Acting Executive Officer, 
Division of Materials Research, Room 1065, National Science 
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: 
(703) 306-1815, FAX (703) 306-0515.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning the continued support for the National High Magnetic 
Field Laboratory (NHMFL) operated by Florida State University, the 
University of Florida, and Los Alamos National Laboratory.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate the progress report and proposal 
for continued funding from the NHMFL.
    Reason for Closing: The progress report being reviewed includes 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposal. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: September 12, 1997.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-24801 Filed 9-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  U NITED S TATES OF A MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 03-7128



# 
A LLEN R AY J OHNSON ,

Defendant-Appellant. 

# 
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge.

(CR-01-167) Submitted: September 29, 2003 Decided: November 4, 2003 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL Allen Ray Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION
PER CURIAM: Allen Ray Johnson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand. Johnson alleged in his § 2241 petition that 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2000), the statute under which he was convicted, had been repealed and, therefore, that his conviction was unconstitutional. The district court found that Johnson could not proceed under § 2241 because he failed to show that a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), was inadequate to test the legality of his detention. We agree and affirm this portion of the district court’s order. To the extent that the district court also construed Johnson’s § 2241 petition as an initial § 2255 motion, we note that the court did notgive Johnson notice and an opportunity to respond before recharacterizing his petition as a § 2255 motion, as required by our decision in United States v. Emmanuel , 288 F.3d 644 (4th Cir. 2002). We therefore vacate this portion of the district court’s order and remand for further proceedings in light of Emmanuel . On remand, the district court should give Johnson the notice required under Emmanuel , consider his claims under § 2255 (barring any objection from Johnson), and provide him a reasonable amount of time to amend the motion to reflect any additional claims for relief. See id. at 649. Finally, we decline to address the issues Johnson raises for the first time on appeal. See Muth v. United States , 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED 2 U NITED S TATES v. J OHNSON
ACCEPTED

06-15-00183-CR

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

10/29/2015 1:46:55 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 10/29/2015 1:46:55 PM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
Exhibit 32
 
 
 In connection with the Quarterly Report of International Commercial Television, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Kelvin Claney, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Richard Ransom, Chief Financial Officer 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 their 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/ Kelvin Claney
 Kelvin Claney, Chief Executive Officer
 
 /s/ Richard Ransom
 Richard Ransom, Chief Financial Officer
 
 Date: May 28, 2010
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2068 

To preserve existing judgeships on the Superior Court of the District of 

Columbia. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 18, 2005 

Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. VOINOVICH, and Mr. AKAKA) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To preserve existing judgeships on the Superior Court of 

the District of Columbia. 

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

3 SECTION 1. COMPOSITION OF SUPERIOR COURT. 

4 Section 903 of title 11 of the District of Columbia 

5 Code is amended by striking ‘‘fifty-eight’’ and inserting 

6 ‘‘61’’. 

Æ
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, James M. Seneff, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the corporate  general partner of CNL Income Fund XVIII, Ltd. (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission of the Partnership's  Annual Report
on Form  10-K for the  period  ending  December  31,  2003 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies 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 Partnership.



Date:  March 22, 2004

                                          /s/ James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                          ----------------------------------
                                          Name:  James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                          Title: Chief Executive Officer


                                          A  signed  original  of  this  written
                                          statement  required by Section 906 has
                                          been   provided  to  CNL  Income  Fund
                                          XVIII,  Ltd.  and will be  retained by
                                          CNL  Income  Fund  XVIII,   Ltd.   and
                                          furnished   to  the   Securities   and
                                          Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
                                          request.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Windell RUBEN, Jr.

No. 62334.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 9, 1978.

In re: Wendell Ruben, Jr. applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Caddo.

Writ denied.
NO. 07-07-0365-CR and 07-07-0366-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL C

NOVEMBER 30, 2007

______________________________

TRAMAYNE DEODRICK JOHNSON, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 108 DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY; TH

NO. 54,419-E, 54,420-E; HONORABLE ABE LOPEZ, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

Before the Court are appellant’s motions to dismiss these appeals pursuant to Rule

42.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Rule 42.2 states that at any time before

the appellate court’s decision, the court may dismiss an appeal upon the appellant’s

motion. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). The appellant and his attorney must sign the written

motion to dismiss. Id. 
2

All of the requirements of Rule 42.2(a) have been satisfied. The Court has

considered these causes on appellant’s motions and concludes the motions should be

granted and the appeals should be dismissed.

Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. No motions for rehearing will be

entertained and our mandates will issue forthwith. 

Mackey K. Hancock

 Justice

Do not publish.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
OUR SECOND QUARTER 1999 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          37,258
<SECURITIES>                                    47,848
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,648
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (341)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                98,513
<PP&E>                                          73,749
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (6,087)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 204,991
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,477
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        39,709
<OTHER-SE>                                     116,748
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   204,991
<SALES>                                          6,683
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,683
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,583
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 902
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (23,594)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (23,594)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (23,594)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.66)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.66)


</TABLE>
Case 4:05-cv-02392-JEJ Document 9 Filed 01/20/06 Page 1 of 1
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION




QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 4(b)    
  


PROTECTIVE LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY P. O. BOX 10648
BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA 35202-0648  




  
 

  
  ANNUAL RESET DEATH BENEFIT RIDER    
  


We are amending the Contract to which this rider is attached by adding the following provisions and making them a part of the Contract as of its Effective Date: 



Annual Reset Death Benefit — We will determine an annual reset anniversary value on each Contract Anniversary occurring
before the earlier of the deceased Owner's 80th birthday or the deceased Owner's date of death. Each annual reset anniversary value is equal to the sum of: the Contract Value on that Contract
Anniversary; plus all Purchase Payments since that Contract Anniversary; minus all amounts surrendered including associated surrender charges since that Contract Anniversary. 


The
death benefit will equal the greatest of: (1) the Contract Value; or (2) aggregate Purchase Payments less aggregate surrenders including associated surrender charges;
or (3) the greatest annual reset anniversary value attained. 


Suspension of Benefit — For a period of one year after any elective change of ownership involving a natural person, we
will suspend the death benefit provided by this rider and the death benefit will equal the Contract Value. 


Signed
for the Company as of the Effective Date. 


PROTECTIVE LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY



	


 	
 	

 
	

Secretary	
 	

 





	AF-2023	 	11/01















QuickLinks


Exhibit 4(b)

ANNUAL RESET DEATH BENEFIT RIDER
PHDATA 5191631_1

March 3, 2015

Justine M. Kasznica

Direct Dial 412-577-5114

E-mail: jkasznica@schnader.com

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Petition for Exemption from Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”)

and Request for Approval to Operate Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the FARs

Dear Sir or Madam:

Enclosed please find Identified Technologies Corporation’s (“Identified’s”) Request for 

Exemption from Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) and Request for Approval to Operate 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the FARs 

(the “Petition”). The Petition was filed on March 2, 2015 using the Federal Docket Management 

System. 

Additionally, we are enclosing Identified’s CONFIDENTIAL Proprietary Material 

Supplement with this Petition. It has not been filed using the Federal Docket Management 

System. We ask that this Supplement be treated as confidential with no public access. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions by phone at (412) 577-5114 or by

email at jkasznica@schnader.com. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely, 

Justine M. Kasznica

Counsel for Identified Technologies Corp.

JMK:caa

Enclosures
EXHIBIT 13


                                  CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES
                                      CODE)

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Progen Industries Limited, a company organized under the
laws of the State of Queensland, Australia (the "Company"), does hereby certify
to such officer's knowledge that:

     The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended June 30, 2003 (the "Form
20-F") of the Company 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 Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Progen Industries Limited and will be retained Progen
Industries Limited and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.


Dated:   December 11, 2003             /s/ Lewis J. Lee
                                    ---------------------------
                                    Lewis J. Lee
                                    Managing Director (chief executive officer)

Dated:   December 11, 2003             /s/ Milton S. McColl
                                    ---------------------------
                                    Milton S. McColl
                                    Chief Financial Officer


<PAGE>
#### COUNTY OF POLK v. J. D. SMITH et al.

No. 38609.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 1969.

Certiorari dismissed without opinion.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2655 

To require certain entities to submit to Congress information on the Basel 

Committee on Bank Supervision, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 27, 2023 

Mr. KENNEDY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To require certain entities to submit to Congress information 

on the Basel Committee on Bank Supervision, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Transparency in Bank5 ing Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. BASEL COMMITTEE ON BANK SUPERVISION. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Board of Governors of the 

8 Federal Reserve System, the Federal Reserve Bank of 

9 New York, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 2655 IS

1 and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in con2 sultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, shall— 

3 (1) not later than January 31 of each year, 

4 jointly submit to Congress, and make available on 

5 the website of the Board of Governors, a report on 

6 the Basel Committee on Bank Supervision, including 

7 the goals of the entities for the Basel Committee on 

8 Bank Supervision meetings, including— 

9 (A) who from each entity will be attending 

10 the meetings; 

11 (B) the various problems to be addressed; 

12 (C) the various options likely to be consid13 ered; 

14 (D) the nature of the standards being con15 sidered for application in the United States or 

16 affecting United States persons or businesses; 

17 (E) what authority will be relied upon to 

18 implement the proposed standards; and 

19 (F) the activities or proposed activities of 

20 all of the subcommittees that report to the 

21 Basel Committee on Bank Supervision; and 

22 (2) not later than 30 days after the date of any 

23 significant change in the planned activities described 

24 in the report submitted under paragraph (1), inform 

25 Congress of such changes, including— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 2655 IS

1 (A) the meeting results; 

2 (B) the economy in general; 

3 (C) a summary of the minutes of the meet4 ing that includes the proposed changes and a 

5 public record of votes or any other of the posi6 tions taken by members of the Committee; 

7 (D) the description of any proposals being 

8 discussed at the meeting; and 

9 (E) the position taken by each of the 

10 United States representatives attending the 

11 meeting. 

12 (b) TESTIMONY.—The Chair and Vice Chair for Su13 pervision of the Board of Governors of the Federal Re14 serve System shall include in their annual testimony be15 fore the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Af16 fairs of the Senate and the Committee on Financial Serv17 ices of the House of Representatives the details of the an18 nual report required under subsection (a). 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Robin Smyth, Chief Financial Officer of ROO Group, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of ROO Group, Inc. for
the quarter ended March 31, 2006;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

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

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

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

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

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

5. The small business issuer's other certifying 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
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions);

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

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

May 19, 2006

/s/ Robin Smyth
----------------------------
Robin Smyth
Chief Financial Officer