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

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 28631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13206]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Document Labelling Guidance for Documents Submitted to 
or Filed With the Commission or Commission Staff

    Take notice that, pursuant to National Archives and Record 
Administration procedures for appropriate handling of documents (81 FR 
63323 (Sept. 14, 2016)), the Commission will follow the Information 
Governance Policy and Guidelines for the Protection of Sensitive 
Information requirements as described below. As a result, every 
submission or filing with the Commission or Commission staff that 
contains sensitive material (as described below) should be labeled 
controlled unclassified information (CUI). The documents described 
below should be labeled as follows:
    Documents containing Critical Energy/Electric Infrastructure 
Information (CEII), see 18 CFR 388.113, should include in a top center 
header of each page of the document the following text: CUI//CEII.
    Documents containing information that section 388.112 of the 
Commission's regulations, 18 CFR 388.112, recognizes as privileged, and 
documents containing information within the scope of protective orders 
and agreements in Commission proceedings, should include in a top 
center header of each page of the document the following text: CUI//
PRIV.
    Documents containing multiple information types, should reference 
each information type in a top center header of each page of the 
document in the following format: CUI//[Information Type]/[Additional 
Information Type], e.g., CUI//CEII/PRIV.
    For information that is CEII, filers are reminded that they must 
clearly segregate those portions of the documents that contain CEII, 
and indicate how long the CEII label should apply (not to exceed five 
years unless redesignated by the CEII Coordinator). See Fixing 
America's Surface Transportation Act, Public Law 114-94, 61,003, 129 
Stat. 1312, 1773-1779 (2015); see also 18 CFR 388.113(d)(1)(i-ii).
    For information that is privileged or within the scope of a 
protective order or agreement, filers are reminded that they also need 
to clearly identify within the document those specific portions of the 
document (i.e., lines or individual words or numbers)--containing such 
material. See 18 CFR 388.112(b).
    This notice supersedes and clarifies an earlier notice issued April 
14, 2017. (See Notice of Document Labelling Guidance for Documents 
Submitted to or Filed with the Commission or Commission Staff, April 
14, 2017)

    Dated: June 14, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-13206 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.1

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

     WHEREAS, the undersigned officers and directors of Vital Signs, Inc. (the
"Corporation") desire to authorize Terry D. Wall, Richard Feigel and Jay J.
Sturm, to act as their attorneys-in-fact and agents, for the purpose of
executing and filing the corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended September 30, 2004, including all amendments thereto,

     NOW, THEREFORE,

     KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears
below constitutes and appoints Terry D. Wall, Richard Feigel and Jay J. Sturm
and each of them, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full
power of substitution and resubstitution, to sign the Corporation's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2004, including any and all
amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other
documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power
and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and
necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully and to all intents and
purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all
that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them, or their or his
substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this power of attorney in
the following capacities on this 14th day of December, 2004.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
       Signature                                      Title
       ---------                                      -----
<S>                              <C>


   /s/ Terry D. Wall             President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
----------------------
     Terry D. Wall


 /s/ David J. Bershad            Director
----------------------
   David J. Bershad


/s/ Howard W. Donnelly           Director
----------------------
  Howard W. Donnelly


/s/ David H. MacCallum           Director
----------------------
  David H. MacCallum


/s/ Richard L. Robbins           Director
----------------------
   Richard L Robbins


/s/ George A. Schapiro           Director
----------------------
  George A. Schapiro


   /s/ Barry Wicker              Executive Vice President, Sales and Director
----------------------
     Barry Wicker


  /s/ Richard Feigel             Interim Chief Financial and Accounting Officer
----------------------
    Richard Feigel
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT  10.1
TERMINATION  AGREEMENT

                              TERMINATION AGREEMENT
                              ---------------------

THIS  AGREEMENT  is  made  on  30  June  2001

AMONG

1)   CHINA  GATEWAY  HOLDINGS,  INC.,  a  Delaware  corporation  (the  "Buyer");
2)   THE  GLORY  FAMOUS  (GROUPS)  LIMITED, a Republic of Seychelles corporation
     (the  "Seller");
3)   HK  GIANTRICH  INTERENATIONAL  (GROUPS)  LIMITED,  a  Niue corporation (the
     "Company").

WHEREAS

A)   The  Buyer  and  Seller  entered  into an Acquisition Agreement dated as of
     April  25,  2001,  intended to engage in the business of coal mining in the
     Shangdong  Province,  of  the  People's  Republic  of  China.

B)   Company  is  engaged  in  the  business  of  coal  mining.

C)   The  Acquisition  Agreement provides that in the event any of the foregoing
     conditions  shall  not  be fulfilled prior to the Closing, unless caused by
     any  action  or  failure  to act on the part of Buyer, Buyer shall have the
     right  to  terminate  the  Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements contained herein, the Parties
hereto,  intending  to  be  legally  bound,  hereby  agree  as  follows:

1.1  The  Buyer  and  Seller  agree  that  the  Acquisition  Agreement is hereby
     terminated.

1.2  The  Buyer  and  Seller  agree  to release and hold the other party herein,
     harmless  from  any  further  liability  or  obligation  of  any  kind with
     reference  to  said  April  25,  2001  Agreement.


<PAGE>
IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  undersigned  have  each  executed and delivered this
agreement  as  of  the  date  first  above  written.


/s/  Danny  Wu

--------------------------
China Gateway Holdings Inc.


/s/  Yau  Mui  Yuen

--------------------------
The Glory famous (Groups) Limited


/s/  Yau  Mui  Yuen

-------------------------
HK Giantrich International (Groups) Limited


<PAGE>
#### CRIPPEN OLDSMOBILE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Appellant, v. Frank BRABEC, Appellee.

No. 70-557.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. *23,*1971.

Wicker, Smith, Pyszka, Blomqvist & Davant, and James H. Gray, Jr., Miami, for appellant.

Fleming, O’Bryan & Fleming, and Thomas B. Mimms, Jr., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and HEN-DRY, J., and BALABAN, HENRY L., Associate Judge.

BALABAN, HENRY L., Associate Judge.

This is an appeal from a final judgment of a Civil Court of Record of Dade County, Florida. There was a jury verdict in the Civil Court of Record entered in favor of the plaintiff-appellee awarding him damages in the sum of $1,400.40 and costs to compensate him for the loss of personal property which had been placed in the trunk of his car, which car with the contents in the trunk, was in the defendant’s possession for repairs. The defendant-appellant kept plaintiff’s car overnight on premises secured by a chain across its car lot in order to proceed with the repairs to be made on the following day. During the night, thieves stole the plaintiff’s car and also a new car belonging to the defendant.

It is understood that the legal relationship of the parties was that of plaintiff-bailor and defendant-bailee’s liability depended on whether the defendant had actual or constructive knowledge of the plaintiff’s said personal property which was lost when the plaintiff’s car, while in the custody of the defendant overnight, was stolen and recovered some days later with the said personal property missing.

Defendant admitted that its agent had left the car keys in the ignition of the said car.

It is elementary that the applicable law depends on the facts established at the trial.

The key issue in the case at bar is factual, to-wit: whether defendant-bailee had actual or constructive knowledge of the said personal property being in the said trunk, as claimed by the plaintiff and denied by the defendant.

*555The jury, acting under the court’s instructions, expressly approved by both plaintiff and defendant, chose to believe the testimony of the plaintiff and his witnesses and rendered a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor.

This court finds, from the trial record submitted, that there was substantial evidence to support the verdict. It is not the function of an appellate court to retry a case or to substitute its judgment for that of a jury. Its review is limited to the correction of errors of law, and is not authorized to review questions of fact. The weight of the evidence and credibility of witnesses are questions which are to be resolved at the trial rather than on appeal. See 2 Fla.Jur. 710, Appeals, Section 340 and cases cited.

The judgment below is affirmed.
FTC Business Alert

Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Consumer Protection Division of Consumer & Business Education

How to Avoid Bamboozling 

Your Customers

Marketers looking to provide more environmentally friendly choices to consumers 

may have heard about bamboo, which has been recognized for its ability to grow 

quickly with little or no need for pesticides. But when it comes to textile products made 

from bamboo, that’s not the whole story. 

The truth is, most “bamboo” textile products, if not all, really are rayon, which 

typically is made using environmentally toxic chemicals in a process that emits 

hazardous pollutants into the air. While different plants, including bamboo, can be used 

as a source material to create rayon, there’s no trace of the original plant in the finished 

rayon product. 

If you make, advertise or sell bamboo-based textiles, the Federal Trade 

Commission, the nation’s consumer protection agency, wants you to know that unless 

a product is made directly with bamboo fiber — often called “mechanically processed 

bamboo” — it can’t be called bamboo. Indeed, to advertise or label a product as 

“bamboo,” you need competent and reliable evidence, such as scientific tests and 

analyses, to show that it’s made of actual bamboo fiber. Relying on other people’s 

claims isn’t substantiation. The same standard applies to other claims, like a claim that 

rayon fibers retain natural antimicrobial properties from the bamboo plant. 

If you sell clothing, linens, or other textile products, you’re responsible for making 

truthful disclosures about the fiber content. If your product isn’t made directly of 

bamboo fiber — but is a manufactured fiber for which bamboo was the plant source — 

it should be labeled and advertised using the proper generic name for the fiber, such as 

rayon, or “rayon made from bamboo.” 

Any claims you make about your textile products have to be true and cannot be 

misleading. As the seller, you must have substantiation for each and every claim — 

express and implied — that you make. 
1-877-FTC-HELP FOR THE CONSUMER

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ftc.gov

August 2009

For More Information

For more information on advertising and labeling rayon and other textile products, 

see Threading Your Way Through the Labeling Requirements Under the Textile and 

Wool Acts. For guidance on making environmental marketing claims, see Complying 

with the Environmental Marketing Guides. These and other guides for business are at 

ftc.gov/bcp/business.shtm. 

The FTC works for the consumer to prevent fraudulent, deceptive and unfair 

business practices in the marketplace and to provide information to help consumers 

spot, stop and avoid them. To file a complaint or to get free information on consumer 

issues, visit ftc.gov or call toll-free, 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357); TTY: 1-866-

653-4261. The FTC enters consumer complaints into the Consumer Sentinel Network, 

a secure online database and investigative tool used by hundreds of civil and criminal 

law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert E. Shaver, Appellant.

[735 NYS2d 836]

Carpinello, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Saratoga County (Scarano, J.), rendered March 31, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal contempt in the first degree.

After waiving indictment, defendant entered a plea of guilty to criminal contempt in the first degree pursuant to Penal Law § 215.51 (c), the sole charge contained in a superior court information. On appeal, he contends that this information, which is subject to the same rules as an indictment *(see,*CPL *732200.15; *see also, People v Fields,*208 AD2d 1050, *lv denied*84 NY2d 935), is jurisdictionally defective, an argument which is not precluded by his guilty plea or waiver of the right to appeal *(see, e.g., People v Hogabone,*278 AD2d 525; *People v George,*261 AD2d 711, *lv denied*93 NY2d 1018; *People v Diaz,*233 AD2d 777; *People v Roe,*191 AD2d 844). Inasmuch as the information fails to allege the labor dispute exception set forth in Penal Law § 215.50, we are constrained to conclude that it must be dismissed as jurisdictionally defective under recent precedent of this Court *(see, People v Kirkham, 273*AD2d 509; *see also, People v Peraza,*288 AD2d 689; *People v Struts,*281 AD2d 655; *People v Hogabone, supra; People v Bingham,*263 AD2d 611, *lv denied*93 NY2d 1014; *but see, People v D’Angelo,*284 AD2d 146).

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and superior court information dismissed.
1 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

COMMISSIONERS: Edith Ramirez, Chairwoman 

 Julie Brill

 Maureen K. Ohlhausen 

 Joshua D. Wright 

____________________________________ 

 ) 

 ) 

In the Matter of ) 

 ) 

 ) Docket No.

Relief-Mart, Inc., ) 

 a corporation. ) 

 ) 

 ) 

____________________________________) 

COMPLAINT

The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Relief-Mart, Inc. 

(“Respondent”) has violated provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and it appearing 

to the Commission that this proceeding is in the public interest, alleges:

1. Respondent is a California corporation with its principal office or place of business at 755 

Lakefield Rd., Ste. H, Westlake Village, CA 91361. Respondent does business under the names 

Relief-Mart and Tempflow. 

2. Respondent manufactures, advertises, offers for sale, sells, and distributes “memory 

foam” mattresses, which are marketed as mattresses that conform to the sleeper’s body shape 

and weight. Respondent distributes these mattresses through its website, www.tempflow.com. 

3. The acts and practices of Respondent alleged in this complaint have been in or affecting 

commerce, as “commerce” is defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. 

4. Respondent has disseminated or has caused the dissemination of promotional materials 

for its memory foam mattresses, including, but not limited to, print advertisements and website 

advertisements in the attached exhibits. 

5. In many instances, including but not limited to the promotional materials shown in 

Exhibits 1 through 3, Respondent has prominently represented that: 

a. Respondent’s memory foam mattresses do not contain volatile organic 

compounds (“VOCs”). Exhibits 1-3. 
2 

b. Respondent’s memory foam mattresses have “no VOC off-gassing.” Exhibit 2. 

c. Respondent’s memory foam mattresses lack the common smell typically 

associated with memory foam. Exhibit 1. 

6. In truth and in fact, Respondent did not possess and rely upon a reasonable basis that 

substantiated the representations set forth in Paragraph 5 at the time the representations were 

made. 

COUNT I (Unsubstantiated Representations) 

7. Through the means described in Paragraphs 4 and 5, Respondent has represented, 

expressly or by implication, that it possessed and relied upon a reasonable basis that 

substantiated the representations set forth in Paragraph 5, at the time the representations were 

made.

8. In truth and in fact, Respondent did not possess and rely upon a reasonable basis that 

substantiated the representations set forth in Paragraph 5 at the time the representations were 

made. Therefore, the representations set forth in Paragraph 7 are false or misleading.

THEREFORE, the Federal Trade Commission, this ____ day of _____ 2013, has issued 

this complaint against Respondent. 

By the Commission.

SEAL: Donald S. Clark 

 Secretary
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

# DATES:

June 8, 2018.

Take notice that during the month of May 2018, the status of the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators or Foreign Utility Companies became effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a) (2017).

Dated: June 8, 2018.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2018-12877 Filed 6-14-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
International airmail postage is required if not mailed in the 

U.S. Postal Service, APO/FPO system, or diplomatic pouch. 

U.S. Postage Paid

39 USC 3406

PAR AVION

OFFICIAL ABSENTEE BALLOTING MATERIAL – FIRST CLASS MAIL

NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IN THE U.S. MAIL – DMM 703.8.0

To

From

(Your name and current complete military or overseas mailing address)

(Your local election office in the United States. Check your State’s pages in the Voting Assistance 

Guide on FVAP.gov for contact information.)
## SERVED FEBRUARY 24, 2010 f-rpT t)r.
. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC ;:)

IN THE MATTER OF PRECISION DISPLAYS AND TOOLS FAA DOCKETNO. CP09AL0008 (Civil Penalty Action) DMS No. FAA-2009-0733 

### AMENDED PROCEDURAL ORDER Paragraph #2 ofthe Procedural Order is amended as follows: WHEREFORE, the parties be and are hereby ORDERED to adhere to the following procedural schedule:

... On or beforeAugust 1, 2010, theparties shallconclude all discovery including, but not limitedto, depositions, documentproduction, responses to production requestsand/or interrogatories. lftheparties cannot resolve a discovery dispute theyshall submit the dispute to the undersignedfor resolution in a timely manner... 1 . . '\

Attachment

- Service List

I The court does not anticipate schedulingthis case priorto 1August 2010.FAA Docket No. CP09AL0008 (Civil Penalty Action) 

### SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & 

### ONE COpy

Federal Aviation Administration 800 IndependenceAvenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 WilbUr Wright Building

- Suite 2WI000 1 

### ONE COpy
Robert Persekian, Owner Precision Displays and Tools, Respondent 1555 Alum Rock Avenue, Suite 20 San.Jose,CA 95116 TEL: 408-504-2515 Howard 

### L. Martin, Jr., Complainant's Counsel Regional Counsel, Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AAL-7 Alaskan Region Federal Aviation Administration. 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14 Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 TEL: 907-271-5269 FAX: 907-271-2800 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. DepartmentofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-320 Washington, DC 20590. TEL: Attorney-Advisor 202-366-2139 Legal Assistant 202-366-5121 FAX: 202-366-7536

I Service was by

## u.s. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Hearing Docket, Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building

- Room 2014, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
In the Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided: March 8, 2022

S 2 2 A 0 533

. EASON et al. v. LUNDY.

PER CURIAM

. The judgment of the court below is affirmed without opinion

pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 59.

A ffirmed without opinion

. All the Justices concur , except Colvin, J., not participating

.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 608 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 608

          To restore the grave marker allowance for veterans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 26, 1993

Mr. Kanjorski introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
          To restore the grave marker allowance for veterans.

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

SECTION 1. GRAVE MARKER ALLOWANCE.

    Section 906 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(e) In lieu of furnishing a headstone or marker under subsection 
(a)(2) or (b) of this section, the Secretary, in the Secretary's 
discretion, having due regard for the circumstances in each case, may 
reimburse the person entitled to request such headstone or marker for 
the cost of acquiring a non-Government headstone or marker for 
placement in any cemetery other than a national cemetery in connection 
with the burial or memorialization of the deceased individual. The cost 
referred to in the preceding sentence is the cost actually incurred by 
or on behalf of such person or the cost prepaid by the deceased 
individual as the case may be. Reimbursement under this subsection may 
be made only upon the request of the person entitled to request the 
headstone or marker and may not be made in an amount in excess of the 
average actual cost, as determined by the Secretary, of headstones and 
markers furnished under subsections (a) and (b) of this section.''.

                                 <all>
```