alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Omics and Genetic Analysis.                    

*Date:*                         April 6, 2012.                    

*Time:*                         8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Tony L Creazzo, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7180, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-435-0725,                         *creazzotl@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: March 13, 2012.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2012-6714 Filed 3-19-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
<PAGE>   1


                                   Exhibit 11

                               Earnings Per Share

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                              Year Ended December 31,
                                                   --------------------------------------------

                                                        1997            1996           1995
                                                        ----            ----           ----

<S>                                                  <C>            <C>             <C>
Average common shares outstanding-basic               4,134,842      4,096,335       3,793,108
                                                      =========      =========       =========
Average common shares outstanding -diluted            4,193,206      4,109,768       3,793,108
                                                      =========      =========       =========

Net income                                           $6,159,839     $4,678,299      $4,129,733
                                                     ==========     ==========      ==========

Per share amount - basic                                $1.49          $1.14           $1.09
                                                        =====          =====           =====
Per share amount - fully diluted                        $1.47          $1.14           $1.09
                                                        =====          =====           =====
</TABLE>


         Earnings per share amounts for each year presented reflect the 5% stock
dividend paid on December 22, 1995,the 5-for-4 stock split effected in August
1996 and the 2-for-1 stock split effected on August 22, 1997.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2406 

To extend the temporary reduction of duty on acrylic or modoacrylic staple 

fibers, not carded, combed, or otherwise processed for spinning. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mrs. HAGAN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary reduction of duty on acrylic or 

modoacrylic staple fibers, not carded, combed, or otherwise processed for spinning. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ACRYLIC OR MODOACRYLIC STAPLE FIBERS, 

4 NOT CARDED, COMBED, OR OTHERWISE 

5 PROCESSED FOR SPINNING. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.25.62 of the Har7 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

8 acrylic or modoacrylic staple fibers, not carded, combed, 

9 or otherwise processed for spinning) is amended by strik10 ing ‘‘12/31/2009’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2406 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2

Section 906 Certification

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NCI, Inc. (the Company)
for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company certifies, to the
best of her knowledge and belief pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 8, 2006 |  | /s/ Judith L. Bjornaas                        
|                     |  | Judith L. Bjornaas                            
|                     |  | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
|                     |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)  

A signed original of the written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to NCI, Inc. and will be
retained by NCI, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Marvin L. DIETRICH and Marjorie Dietrich, Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Appellee.

No. 74-1276.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 13, 1974.

Decided Sept. 25, 1974.

Truman Clare, Omaha, Neb., for appellants.

Ann Belanger Durney, Tax Div., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., for ap-pellee.

Before VOGEL, Senior Circuit Judge, and ROSS and WEBSTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Upon a careful consideration of the record, the briefs and oral argument, the Court has concluded that the factual findings of the Tax Court are not clearly erroneous, that its decision is based upon a correct interpretation of the law as applied to the pleadings and the facts of the case, and that an opinion would have no precedential value. *See*Leathers v. United States, 471 F.2d 856 (8th Cir. 1972); Wertzberger v. United States, 441 F.2d 1166 (8th Cir. 1971). For these reasons the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed without opinion.

See Rule 14 of the Rules of this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2318 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2318

   To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on 3 Chloro 4 Methyl 
                                Aniline.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

  Mr. Brown (for himself and Mr. Voinovich) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on 3 Chloro 4 Methyl 
                                Aniline.

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

SECTION 1. 3 CHLORO 4 METHYL ANILINE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.25.16 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 3 Chloro 4 Methyl Aniline) 
is amended by striking the date in the effective column period and 
inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2073 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2073

            To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-
             (isocyanatosulfonyl)benzoic acid, ethyl ester.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-
             (isocyanatosulfonyl)benzoic acid, ethyl ester.

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

SECTION 1. 2-(ISOCYANATOSULFONYL) BENZOIC ACID, ETHYL ESTER.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.11.96 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 2-
(isocyanatosulfonyl)benzoic acid, ethyl ester) is amended by striking 
``12/31/2009'' and inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 18
February 16, 1998


Mercury Finance Company
100 Field Drive
Suite 340
Lake Forest, Illinois  60045

Gentlemen:

This letter is written to meet the requirements of Regulation S-K calling for a
letter from a registrant's independent accountants whenever there has been a
change in accounting principle or practice.

As of September 30, 1996, Mercury Finance Company (the "Company") changed to a
methodology of reserving for finance credit losses commonly referred to as
"static pooling."  Under the static pooling methodology, the Company stratifies
the components of its sales finance receivable portfolio into separately
identified pools based upon the month in which the loans were acquired.  A
portion of the dealer reserve is made available to cover estimated credit losses
for each identified monthly pool based on the relationship between dealer
reserves and total anticipated credit losses over the life of each specific
pool.  The method previously used by the Company analyzed reserve adequacy on
a total portfolio basis.  According to the management of the Company, this
change was made for more appropriate matching of finance charge income and
provision for finance credit losses over the life of the receivable pools.

A complete coordinated set of financial and reporting standards for determining
the preferability of accounting principles among acceptable alternative
principles has not been established by the accounting profession.  Thus, we
cannot make an objective determination of whether the change in the accounting
described in the preceding paragraph is to a preferable method.  However, we
have reviewed the pertinent factors, including those related to financial
reporting, in this particular case on a subjective basis, and our opinion stated
below is based on our determination made in this manner.

We are of the opinion that the Company's change in method of accounting is to an
acceptable alternative method of accounting, which, based upon the reasons
stated for the change and our discussions with you, is also preferable under the
circumstances in this particular case.  In arriving at this opinion, we have
relied on the business judgment and business planning of your management.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
#### STATE ex rel. Prince SMITH v. Hon. William P. POLK, Judge, Ninth Judicial District Court, Parish of Rapides.

No. 86-KH-2466.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 25, 1987.

In re Smith, Prince; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. K86-686; Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court, Div. “B”, No. 144248.

Denied.
```

            Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant To
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350
      As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002

I, Glenn J. Heiar, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of Armor Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual
Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Armor Holdings, Inc.

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

Date: March 7, 2005                           By:    /s/ Glenn J. Heiar
                                                     ---------------------------
                                              Name:  Glenn J. Heiar
                                              Title: Chief Financial Officer
```
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 114 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.114
                                      Agreed to October 24, 2000        

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                          Concurrent Resolution

Whereas over 4 million Americans served in World War I, however, there 
  is no nationally recognized symbol honoring the service of such 
  Americans;
Whereas in 1919, citizens of Kansas City expressed an outpouring of 
  support, raising over $2,000,000 in 2 weeks, which was a fundraising 
  accomplishment unparalleled by any other city in the United States 
  irrespective of population;
Whereas on November 1, 1921, the monument site was dedicated marking 
  the only time in history that the 5 Allied military leaders 
  (Lieutenant General Baron Jacques of Belgium, General Armando Diaz of 
  Italy, Marshal Ferdinand Foch of France, General John J. Pershing of 
  the United States, and Admiral Lord Earl Beatty of Great Britain) 
  were together at one place;
Whereas during a solemn ceremony on Armistice Day in 1924, President 
  Calvin Coolidge marked the beginning of a 3-year construction project 
  by the laying of the cornerstone of the Liberty Memorial;
Whereas the 217-foot Memorial Tower topped with 4 stone ``Guardian 
  Spirits'' representing courage, honor, patriotism, and sacrifice, 
  rises above the observation deck, making the Liberty Memorial a noble 
  tribute to all who served;
Whereas during a rededication of the Liberty Memorial in 1961, former 
  Presidents Harry S Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower recognized the 
  memorial as a constant reminder of the sacrifices during World War I 
  and the progress that followed;
Whereas the Liberty Memorial is the only public museum in the United 
  States specifically dedicated to the history of World War I; and
Whereas the Liberty Memorial is internationally known as a major center 
  of World War I remembrance: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the Liberty Memorial in Kansas City, Missouri, is recognized as a 
national World War I symbol, honoring those who de-
fended liberty and our country through service in World War I.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2233

HOANG TAING,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

PENNY PRITZKER, Honorable; Secretary of Commerce; KATHRYN H. 

ANDERSON, Honorable; Office of Civil Rights, CENHQ 3H068; 

WILLIAM W. HATCHER, Honorable; U.S. Census Bureau/RCC; DANA 

JAMES BOENTE, Honorable; US Acting Attorney; LORETTA E. LYNCH, 

Honorable; Attorney General,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, Senior 

District Judge. (1:13-cv-01281-TSE-TCB)

Submitted: June 25, 2015 Decided: June 29, 2015

Before GREGORY, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam 

opinion.

Hoang Taing, Appellant Pro Se. Antonia Marie Konkoly, OFFICE OF 

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Hoang Taing appeals the district court’s orders granting 

summary judgment to Appellees and denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)

motion for reconsideration in this employment discrimination 

action. We affirm in part and dismiss in part.

When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, 

the notice of appeal must be filed no more than 60 days after the 

entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. 

App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal 

period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period 

under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The district court’s order granting 

summary judgment to Appellees was entered on the docket on July 7, 

2014. The notice of appeal was filed on November 10, 2014. Because

Hoang Taing failed to file a timely notice of appeal from the order

granting summary judgment or to obtain an extension or reopening 

of the appeal period, we dismiss this portion of the appeal for 

lack of jurisdiction. 

Turning to the order denying reconsideration, we have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we 

affirm the denial of Rule 60(b) relief for the reasons stated by 

the district court. Hoang Taing v. Pritzker, No. 1:13-cv-01231-

TSE-TCB (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 5, 2014; entered Nov. 6, 2014). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions 
3

are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED IN PART;

DISMISSED IN PART
#### Lorraine M. SMITH v. HARTFORD INSURANCE CO., Coleman Oldsmobile Inc. and Wallace Pourciau.

No. 88-C-0930.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 13, 1988.

In re Hartford Ins. Co.; Coleman Oldsmobile Inc.; Pourciau, Wallace; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CA87 1191; Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court, Div. “E”, No. 304700.

Prior report: La.App., 524 So.2d 550.

Denied.

CALOGERO, MARCUS and COLE, JJ., would grant the writ.
TELEPHONE CONTACT SUMMARY

Brick and Structural Clay Products

FROM: Gabrielle Raymond
RTI International

DATE OF CONTACT: August 31, 2009

ORGANIZATION CONTACTED:
Boral Bricks Inc.
200 Mansell Court East Suite 305 Roswell, GA 30076

PERSON CONTACTED: Terry Schimmel

334-480-2488

PURPOSE OF CONTACT: For information on the configuration of controlled sawdust-fired tunnel kilns at two different Boral Bricks, Inc. (Boral) facilities.

SUMMARY OF CONTACT:

Mr. Schimmel stated that, for the EU5 kiln at the A ugusta, Georgia plant, the dry injection fabric filter (DIFF) is installed on the kiln exhaust. Boral purchases dried sawdust and does not operate a sawdust dryer at the plant.

For the 6BK kiln at the Salisbury, North Carolina p lant, the DIFF is installed on
the kiln exhaust. The kiln exhaust can be diverted to the sawdust dryer or can go through the DIFF depending on if the dryer is running and t he demand for dried sawdust.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-50575

Conference Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Pedro Contreras, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 7:19-CR-251-1

Before Graves, Willett, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Pedro Contreras has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed briefsin accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Contreras has responded. We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 7, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-50575 Document: 00515812266 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/07/2021
No. 20-50575

2

relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Contreras’s 

responses. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for 

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. 

R. 42.2.

Case: 20-50575 Document: 00515812266 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/07/2021