alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 09-508 

________________________________________________________________________ 

EXTRADITION 

 Treaty Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and ROMANIA 

Signed at Bucharest September 10, 2007 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 ROMANIA 

 Extradition 

Treaty signed at Bucharest September 10, 2007; 

Transmitted by the President of the United States of America 

 to the Senate January 22, 2008 (Treaty Doc. 110-11, 

 110th Congress, 2d Session); 

Reported favorably by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 

 July 29, 2008 (Senate Executive Report No. 110-12, 

 110th Congress, 2d Session); 

Advice and consent to ratification by the Senate 

 September 23, 2008; 

Ratified by the President December 11, 2008; 

Exchange of Instruments of Ratification 

 at Washington May 8, 2009; 

Entered into force May 8, 2009.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 206 (Friday, October 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 55416]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27930]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-4235-N-26]


Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and 
surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible 
use to assist the homeless.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 24, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Johnston, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Room 7256, 
451 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-1226; 
TDD number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565 (these 
telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free Title V 
information line at 1-800-927-7588.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the December 12, 1988 
court order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans 
Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.), HUD publishes a Notice, on a 
weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus 
Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for 
suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the 
purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been 
determined suitable or unsuitable this week.

    Dated: October 16, 1997.
Fred Karnas, Jr.,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic Development.
[FR Doc. 97-27930 Filed 10-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-29-M
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 Bio Matrix Scientific Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to her 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 Company.



|Date: August 2,  2016 | By: | /s/  David R. Koos                         
|--------------------- | --- | -------------------------------------------
|                      |     | David R. KoosActing Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or other document authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting
the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been
provided to Bio Matrix Scientific Group, Inc. and will be retained by Bio Matrix Scientific Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Dorris W. McBEE and Ralph A. McBee, her husband, Appellants, v. Eugene Albert CAIN and Robert Russell Reynolds, Appellees.

No. 69-103.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 31, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 29, 1970.

*179John M. Cain, Orlando, for appellants.

James O. Driscoll, of Driscoll Baugh & LaGrone, Orlando, for appellee Eugene Albert Cain.

Charles M. McCarty, Orlando, for ap-pellee Robert Russell Reynolds.

OWEN, Judge.

The judgment is affirmed. We conclude that under the facts of this case and on the authority of Perdue v. Copeland, Fla.1969, 220 So.2d 617; Morse Auto Rentals, Inc. v. Kravitz, Fla.1967, 197 So.2d 817; and Connolly v. Steakley, Fla.1967, 197 So.2d 524, the court properly declined to give an instruction to the jury upon the doctrine of last clear chance. We are also of the opinion that the procedure followed by the court in reinstructing the jury on a specific point at the jury’s request following a period of deliberation was not error. Zanetti v. Weissler, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 383.

CROSS, C. J., concurs.

WALDEN, J., dissents, with opinion.

WALDEN, Judge

(dissenting):

I am of the opinion that the trial court erred, under the facts, in failing to give an instruction upon the doctrine of last clear chance. While, as in many cases, there may be conflicting inferences and evidence, there is a fair basis in the record for the jury to believe that Mrs. McBee’s negligence, if any, had terminated at the time of the collisions. Thus, it was reversible error for the trial court to refuse to give a charge which laid down standards for the jury to follow under varying permissible views of the evidence, where the evidence was inconclusive or conflicting. Holley v. Kelley, Fla.1957, 91 So.2d 862; Barnes v. State, Fla.1957, 93 So.2d 863; Schweikert v. Palm Beach Speedway, Inc., Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 804.

I would reverse and remand for a new trial.
#### DOMAIRE, S. A., a Dominican corporation, Appellant, v. F. A. CONNER, Appellee.

No. 70-462.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 14, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 5, 1970.

Merwin E. Taylor, Miami Springs, for appellant.

*125Nicholson, Howard, Brawner & Lovett, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and BARK-DULL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Harris & Company Advertising, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba, Fla.App.1961, 127 So.2d 687; Payton v. Swanson, Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d 48.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 208 (Tuesday, October 28, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 55773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28523]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Fiscal Service

31 CFR Part 208

RIN 1510-AA56


Management of Federal Agency Disbursements: Hearing in Los 
Angeles, CA

AGENCY: Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Treasury.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: This document schedules an additional public hearing on 
proposed regulations relating to the government's use of electronic 
funds transfer to make all Federal payments, with the exception of tax 
refunds, after January 1, 1999.

DATES: There will be a public hearing in Los Angeles on Tuesday, 
December 9, 1997 beginning at 9:00 a.m. Requests to testify at the 
hearing and outlines of testimony must be received by December 1.

ADDRESSES: The public hearing in Los Angeles will be held at the 
Federal Reserve Bank. The Bank is located at 950 S. Grand Avenue, Los 
Angeles, California, 90015.
    Send requests to testify and outlines of testimony to Martha 
Thomas-Mitchell. See For Further Information Contact.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Thomas-Mitchell at (202) 874-
6757 or at Internet address <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4c212d3e38242d62382423212d3f612125382f242920200c2a213f623f3c3e252238622f2321"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bdd0dccfc9d5dc93c9d5d2d0dcce90d0d4c9ded5d8d1d1fddbd0ce93cecdcfd4d3c993ded2d0">[email protected]</span></a>. The 
following toll free number is also available for registration 
information and inquiries:
1-800-344-0218 (hours of operation are 7:00 a.m.--5:00 p.m. Pacific 
Standard Time). For general information on the proposed regulation, 
contact Robyn Schulhof at (202) 874-6754 or Diana Shevlin at (202) 874-
7032.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice of proposed rulemaking appearing in 
the Federal Register on September 16, 1997 (62 FR 48714) announced that 
three public hearings would be held in Dallas, New York City, and 
Baltimore. This notice adds an additional hearing in Los Angeles.

    Dated: October 23, 1997.
Michael T. Smokovich,
Deputy Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 97-28523 Filed 10-27-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
255 La. 1093

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. R. B. LOVE v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary et al.

No. 50554.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 5, 1970.

In re: R. B. Love applying for writ of habeas corpus.

Not considered. Applicant has not complied with the rules of this Court. See Section *7*of Rule XII of our Rules.
**CERTIFICATIONS**
 
 
 I, Kevin
D. Johnson, certify that;
 
 (1)    
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of Snap2 Corporation;
 
 (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, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 
 b)   
Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls
and procedures 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 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 the 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):
 
 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.
 
 
 Date:  May 18,
2005
   /s/      
Kevin D.
Johnson
 By:     
Kevin D. Johnson
 Title:  
Chief Financial Officer
PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION (To be completed by agency):

TO: CNAME DADDRESS OF NEWSPAPER> P Reaoing Times :b&Fr ivette .. nouse FRpM: (NAME ANcDDReS OF AGENCY)

Attn: Legal Advertising Bureau of Air Quait

P0. Box 582 400 Market St., 12th Floor

Reading, PA 19603—0582 flarriaburg, PA 17105

HEREWITH ENCLOSED COPY FOR PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR PROPOSALS TO TYPE OF AD

EMPLOY PURCHASE CONTRACT SELL CLASSIFIED LEGAL NOTICE

You, as vendor, are authorized to publish this advertisement in your newspaper, subject to the terms of this order, as follows: Advertisement to be published in regular advertising columns, no position specified; caption of two lines and. signature

to be in capitals and subject matter and title of officer.to be set solid in typ gui jyj,çLby_your newspaper for public (legal) notice advertising; charge to be made at the rate charged to and paid by commercial advertisers far matter similarly set and occupying similar space advertisement to be run in the editions specified above Vendor agrees that in the performance of any

contract awarded to it hereunder said vendor will not discriminate against any employe or other persons on account of race color

sex religious creed ancestry age or national origin and that the Commonwealth upon receipt of satisfactory evidence of such discrimination, shall have the right to cancel said contract. Return this copyat once if you will not accept this advertisement under the terms

set forth - —..——.- —

Proof of advertisinrnTh’e form of a tearsheet must be included on Parts 1,2 & 3. Return original and two copies (signed by the editor or publisher) to Agency listed above. Parli must barizedPart*iyours.

Commonwealth to be billed onlyfor actual number ofprinted linepblished.

I.,_ I

ACCOUNt

-‘

FUND DEPT APP YEAR LOG ORG

CODE

.$fr’ Ooi”iv742(9t2

I

, COSTPUNCTION 83 .AMOUNT

I Lt-/J

DATE OF INSERTION ACTUAL NO. OF PRINTED LINES COST PER LINE TOTAL AMOUNT

istAd 10114109 360 2.15 ;. 774.00

ZndAd

3rd Ad -— bold charge 2.pO

-_- — ffF ‘vit cbrge 5.00 - GRAND TOTAL—- 781.00

PASTE TEARSHEET HERE

v.:W>

Commonwltf Pennsylvania

County of

Before me, the subscriber, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally came 1.yUS S tier

who being duly sworn, doth depose and say that he is” Asiatant Secretary

the Eagle a general newspaper published at leadiug 

COMMONWEALTK OF PENNSYLVANIA

. INVc,N0, STD—521 REV. 12-88

PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION AND INVOICE 1.52154

PUBUSH ADVERTISEMENT (NO. OF TIMES)

I

MAXIMUM NO. OF LINES

DATES OF INSER11ON

October 14,2009, Wednesday edition

DATE

October 16, 2009

ORDER NO.

SIGJNATURE FOR AENCY

. /7

(kit: y’

‘dby publishei)i’

“.

I 34’27/tODO I(—L I
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 205 (Thursday, October 23, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 55235]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28041]



[[Page 55235]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP97-92-001]


Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Site Visit

October 17, 1997.
    On October 28, 1997, beginning at 2:00 p.m., the Office of Pipeline 
Regulation (OPR) staff will conduct a site inspection of the onshore 
facilities of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation's Mobile Bay 
Lateral Extension and Expansion Project in Mobile County, Alabama. The 
first proposed facility to be visited will be compressor station 83, 
near the city of Citronelle. In the morning of the following day we 
will see the Coden area facilities.
    All parties may attend. Those planning to attend must provide their 
own transportation and should meet the staff at the JR Food Mart in 
Citronelle at the intersection of Jefferies Highway (Route 96) and US 
45.
    For further information, please contact Paul McKee at (202) 208-
1088.
Robert J. Cupina,
Deputy Director, Office of Pipeline Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-28041 Filed 10-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
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

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Varian Semiconductor Equipment Associates, Inc. (the Company) for the
period ended April 2, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
that:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |                        
|------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: May 10, 2010 |  | /s/ GARY E. DICKERSON  
|                    |  | Gary E. Dickerson      
|                    |  | Chief Executive Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ASIF MUHAMMED and FARHANA

ASIF,

Petitioners,

 v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney

General,

Respondent.

No. 14-70685

Agency Nos. A079-628-793

A079-628-794

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted June 13, 2018

San Francisco, California

Before: SCHROEDER, EBEL,** and OWENS, Circuit Judges. 

Petitioners Asif Muhammed and Farhana Asif, natives and citizens of

Pakistan, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (“BIA”) order

denying their untimely motion to reopen based on changed country conditions. We

FILED

JUN 29 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The Honorable David M. Ebel, United States Circuit Judge for the

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, sitting by designation.
review the BIA’s denial of the motion to reopen for abuse of discretion, see

Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010), and deny the petition. 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Petitioners have

failed to show materially changed country conditions in Pakistan. Petitioners

argue that Americans and Westerners face significant risks in traveling to Pakistan. 

Such risks, however, were documented in the record at Petitioners’ merits hearing. 

Petitioners’ new evidence shows a continuation of the same conditions and does

not qualitatively differ from the evidence they presented originally. See Salim v.

Lynch, 831 F.3d 1133, 1137 (9th Cir. 2016). 

Petitioner Muhammed also argues his family would be the target of violence

on account of his former employment with Western oil companies, but this

argument has been considered and rejected by the BIA and this Court. See

Muhammed v. Holder, 543 F. App’x 652, 652–53 (9th Cir. 2013). Petitioner has

failed to produce qualitatively different evidence in support of the motion to

reopen. Nor has Petitioner Muhammed produced qualitatively different evidence

about his involvement in the political party MQM-H or the risks he would face

upon return because of that involvement. Petitioner’s generalized grievance about

Pakistan’s education system does not establish any material change in country

conditions. 

PETITION DENIED. 

2
#### James A. LAMPA, Appellant, v. BLUE CROSS OF FLORIDA, INC., et al., Appellees.

No. 76-1184.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 26, 1977.

R. Edward Cooley and James W. Markel of Graham, Markel & Scott, P.A., Winter Park, for appellant.

James M. Corrigan and Thomas F. Lang of Maguire, Voorhis & Wells, P.A. Orlando, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Upon review and consideration of the record we are of the opinion that the judgment sought to be reviewed is neither a final judgment subject to a plenary appeal nor within the category of orders subject to an interlocutory appeal, under Rule 4.2, Fla. App.R. Furthermore, finding no basis in the record to provide review by way of common law certiorari, the subject appeal is dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

MAGER, C. J., and CROSS and LETTS, JJ., concur.