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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 66 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 66

      To amend title 39, United States Code, to exempt veterans' 
    organizations from regulations prohibiting the solicitation of 
                   contributions on postal property.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 1993

Mr. Bilirakis introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To amend title 39, United States Code, to exempt veterans' 
    organizations from regulations prohibiting the solicitation of 
                   contributions on postal property.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 403 of 
title 39, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(d)(1) For the purpose of this subsection--
            ``(A) the term `veterans' organization' means an 
        organization described in section 501(c)(19) of the Internal 
        Revenue Code of 1986; and
            ``(B) the term `postal property' means any real property 
        under the charge or control of the Postal Service, including 
        any real property leased by or for the Postal Service.
    ``(2) The Postal Service shall take appropriate measures to ensure 
that nothing in its regulations shall prevent a veterans' organization 
from soliciting contributions on postal property, so long as those 
activities do not impede or disturb--
            ``(A) postal employees in the performance of their duties; 
        or
            ``(B) the general public in transacting business or 
        obtaining services provided on such property.''.

                                 <all>
```
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 Quarterly Report of Wireless Frontier Internet,
Inc. (f/k/a Fremont Corporation) (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the periods
ended: March 31, 1999; June 30, 1999; and September 30, 1999 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Sandy
Landstrom, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

          (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities and 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.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Wireless Frontier Internet, Inc. and will be retained by
Wireless Frontier Internet, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

May 27, 2004                        /s/ Sandy Landstrom
                                    -----------------------------------
                                        Sandy Landstrom
                                        Chief Financial Officer
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 Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q of Massey Energy Company (the “Company”) for the quarter ending
September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), I, Eric B. Tolbert, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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.







/s/ Eric B.
      TolbertEric
      B. TolbertVice
      President and Chief Financial OfficerNovember
      7, 2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                    UT
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000,000
<CIK>                                        0000037637
<NAME>                                       FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION
       
<S>                                                    <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                           SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          9-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                                           PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                                  3,532
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                                  202
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       467
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                                       0
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                                96
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             4,297
<COMMON>                                                   1,004
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                                      0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                          834
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                             1,838
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                   34
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                       1,176
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                             0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                                 0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                                 21
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                     25
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                                    0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                               0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                             1,203
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                              4,297
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                                  1,831
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                         113
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                 1,451
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                 1,564
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                                      267
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                             0
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                               267
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      72
<NET-INCOME>                                                 195
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                    5
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                                190
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                     116
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                                      0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                                       495
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               0.00
        



</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                  EXHIBIT 24.2

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY
                                ARTHUR S. PEARSON


        KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned, Arthur S. Pearson
constitutes and appoints David T. Howard or Steven H. Moger his true and lawful
attorney-in-fact and agent, for him and his name, place and stead, in any and
all capacities, to sign the Form 10-KSB of Nutraceutix, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000, and any amendments or
supplements thereto, and to file this Power of Attorney and the Form 10-KSB with
all exhibits thereto, and to the documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and the NASDAQ National Market System,
granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do and
perform each requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as
fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby
ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agent, may do or
cause to be done by virtue hereof.

        Dated this 26th day of March, 2001.

Signature:



/s/ Arthur S. Pearson
------------------------------------
Arthur S. Pearson



                                       24
#### Esther B. RAY, Appellant, v. Wendell E. RAY, Appellee.

No. 69-987.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 9, 1971.

Rehearing Denied May 13, 1971.

Milton M. Ferrell, Miami, for appellant.

I. Stanley Levine, Richard M. Gale, Miami, for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

From a judgment granting her suit for divorce the plaintiff appealed, charging error in rulings therein relating to her property claims and contending that the allowances made to her for alimony and child support were inadequate. We have examined the several contentions of the appellant in the light of the record and briefs and find therein no lawful basis to disturb the judgment, except in the respect specified below. The case was fully tried, and with the exception of the item noted below, the trial court ruled correctly on the issues relating to property. The matter of the amounts to be allowed for alimony and child support was one resting in the sound judicial discretion of the court. In our view the appellant has not sustained her burden to show an abuse of discretion therein.

The appellee received a substantial income tax refund which resulted from an overpayment of income tax on the sale of Discountland of Dade, Inc. of which all of the stock was held by or for the parties. The trial court held the appellant wife was entitled to receive approximately one half of the net proceeds from that sale, but did not make provision for the appellant to receive from the appellee one half of such tax refund. Upon remand of the cause the judgment should be amended to so provide. Other than as to that feature the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded.

ON REHEARING

A petition of the appellee for rehearing and for clarification discloses that the income tax refund referred to in our opinion of March 9, 1971, has not yet been received. We directed that upon remand of the cause provision should be made for the appellant wife to receive one half of the tax refund. Our decision is clarified and amended to direct that upon remand provision should be made by the trial court for the appellant wife to receive one half of the said income tax refund when the same is refunded or otherwise made available to *474the parties or to the appellee. Except for this clarification and modification our judgment and opinion in this case is adhered to, and the petition for rehearing is denied.
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 Defense

###### Department of the Army

# AGENCY:

Department of the Army, DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice; registration website available.

# SUMMARY:

                        The notice for Request for Information on Technologies to Support Operations in the Information Environment published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Wednesday, May 23, 2018, did not request participants to register online. This notice publicizes the registration website:                         *http://www.cvent.com/​d/​mgqsvs*.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth K. Bowman, Telephone (410) 278-55924.

Brenda S. Bowen,

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 2018-13226 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-03-P
#### Vertie Lee Johnson PEARCE v. FORD MOTOR CO. et al.

No. 45609.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Jan. 26, 1970.

Burgin, Gholson & Hicks, Columbus, John P. Fox, Houston, for appellant.

Watkins & Eager, Elizabeth Hulen, Jackson, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Clifford KIDD, Appellee.

No. 70-386.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 6, 1971.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and John A. Zebedee, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellant.

Robert E. Jagger, Public Defender, and Frank H. White, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of Fla.Stat. § 901.15 (1969), F.S.A.

PIERCE, C. J., and LILES and MANN, JJ., concur.
LOG OF MEETING
DIRECTORATE FOR ENGINEERING SCIENCES

SUBJECT: ASTM Hand Held Carrier Task Group Meeting
DATE OF MEETING: June 3 , 2013
PLACE OF MEETING: Teleconference
LOG ENTRY SOURCE: Patricia Edwards
COMMISSION ATTENDEES: Patricia Edwards

, Vince Amodeo
NON

- COMMISSION ATTENDEES: Contact ASTM for attendee list

SUMMARY OF MEETING: The task group had a conference call to discuss ASTM standard, F2050

- 12, section 6.1 Carry Handle Auto

- locking requirement. At the last task group meeting, held April 26, 2013, the following action item s were agreed to:

• Manufacturers of carriers intended for use in motor vehicles will perform testing per the current s tandard using the 12 month

- old Crabi ATD

.

• Manufacturers and labs will test products with webbing straps in place of the metal hooks to better accommodate the various carry handle shapes

.

• Ma nufacturers and labs will test products where instead of lifting the unit, the supporting surface w ill be lowered from the carrier allowing it to be suspended in the hooks and webbing straps

.

• In all testing, lifting or removing the support surface, either action should be performed over 1.5

– 2.0 seconds

.

T he following observations were discussed during the conference call :

A. The 2” wide webbing was more forgiv ing in set

- up than the hooks. It was e asier

to maneuver the seat under the air cylinder without the handle movement.

B. The Crabi had less variability in placement than the CAMI due to the lar ge r, rounded butt of the dummy. But, you c ould still manipulate to produce pass or fail results based on placement of the dummy. Many test labs don ’ t own Crabi ’ s.

C. Mixed results when the carrier was lowered, rather than raised. In some cases it caused more swinging and extra motion to the carrier.

D. Longer lift time helps. Requiring the use of an air cylinder to conduct the lift should be part of the test procedure. Provides consistency in testing.

E. Cami and the hinged plate are the two best options. The focus should be to m ake Cami more repeatable or change the hinged plate to make it more like a true

surrogate.

Don Huber wil l prepare a ballot item with suggested changes and route it through the task group for comments, before sending it to ASTM for ballot.
#### Thomas Marvin BLACKBURN, Sr., Appellant, v. REDWING CARRIERS, INC., a foreign corporation doing business in the State of Florida, and Standard Oil Company, a foreign corporation doing business in the State of Florida, Appellees.

No. 72-183.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 16, 1973.

Joseph S. Rodriguez, St. Petersburg, for appellant.

Glenn M. Woodworth, of Ulmer & Woodworth, St. Petersburg, for appellee, Standard Oil Co.

PER CURIAM.

Blackburn was injured at a Standard Oil Company bulk plant when a heavy hose and nozzle was knocked loose by a vehicle owned by Redwing' Carriers, Inc. He alleged that Standard Oil and Redwing were concurrently negligent. Standard Oil won a summary judgment in the trial court, from which this appeal is taken, having shown that the Redwing vehicle was of abnormal height and that its driver had entered an area designed solely for use by small de*142livery trucks. Standard Oil’s argument “that any reasonably prudent truck driver would have been aware that he could not safely drive his truck into that area without causing damage to property or persons” overlooks the fact that this may be perfectly true and yet the entry of such a vehicle into the area and injury such as occurred here might have been foreseeable. The record discloses a sufficient basis for Blackburn’s contention that Standard Oil might have been negligent in failing to foresee and guard against the accident which occurred. Summary judgment at this stage was therefore improper.

Reversed and remanded.

MANN, C. J., HOBSON, J., and PIERCE, J. (Ret.), concur.
Exhibit 32.2


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


In connection with The Beard Company's (the "Company") Report on Form 10-Q for
the period  ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and  Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Herb Mee, Jr., President and
Chief 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, to the best of my knowledge:

1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:  May 22, 2006                  By:         /s/ Herb Mee, Jr.
                                                     Herb Mee, Jr.
                                          President and Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 28432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13116]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration


Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the 
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA) 
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention's (CSAP) Drug Testing Advisory 
Board (DTAB) will convene via web conference on August 8, 2018, from 
9:00 a.m. EDT to 5:00 p.m. EDT.
    The board will meet in closed-session via web conference on August 
8, 2018, from 9:00 a.m. EDT to 5:00 p.m. EDT to discuss the proposed 
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (hair 
specimens). Therefore, the meeting is closed to the public as 
determined by the Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance 
Use, SAMHSA, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and (9)(B), and 5 
U.S.C. App. 2, Section 10(d).
    Meeting registration information can be completed at http://snacregister.samhsa.gov/MeetingList.aspx. Web conference and call 
information will be sent after completing registration. Meeting 
information and a roster of DTAB members may be obtained by accessing 
the SAMHSA Advisory Committees website, http://www.samhsa.gov/about-us/advisory-councils/drug-testing-advisory-board-dtab or by contacting the 
Designated Federal Officer, CAPT Sean J. Belouin, USPHS.
    Committee Name: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
Administration's Drug Testing Advisory Board.
    Dates/Time/Type: August 8, 2018, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EDT: 
CLOSED.
    Place: Web Conference.
    Contact: CAPT Sean J. Belouin, USPHS, Senior Pharmacology and 
Regulatory Policy Advisor, Division of Workplace Programs, 5600 Fishers 
Lane, Room 16N06D, Rockville, Maryland 20857, Telephone: (240) 276-
2600, Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#780b1d1916561a1d14170d1116380b1915100b195610100b561f170e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="750610141b5b1710191a001c1b350614181d06145b1d1d065b121a03">[email protected]</span></a>.

Carlos Castillo,
Committee Management Officer, SAMHSA.
[FR Doc. 2018-13116 Filed 6-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4162-20-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED September 8, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50141 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus
JUAN LOPEZ-SALAZAR, also known as Martin Esparza-Perez, also known as Juan Salazar Perez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-1975

-------------------- Before KING, GARWOOD, and JOLLY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Juan LopezSalazar raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.