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

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

March 24, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135625 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 135625 

 COA: 271838 

Jackson CC: 06-000157-FC 

JAMES WHETSTONE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 11, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0317 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

March 24, 2008 

 Clerk
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 37

Expressing the sense of Congress that State and local governments and

local educational agencies are encouraged to dedicate a day of learning

to the study and understanding of the Declaration of Independence,

the United States Constitution, and the Federalist Papers.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 7, 1999

Mr. SESSIONS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that State and local governments and local educational agencies are encouraged

to dedicate a day of learning to the study and understanding of the Declaration of Independence, the United

States Constitution, and the Federalist Papers.

Whereas the adoption of the Declaration of Independence in

1776, the signing of the United States Constitution in

1787, and the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1789

were principal events in the history of the United States;

Whereas these documents stand as the foundation of our

form of democracy, providing at the same time the touchstone of our national identity and the vehicle for orderly

growth and change;
2

•SCON 37 IS

Whereas the Federalist Papers embody an eloquent and

forceful argument made in support of the adoption of our

republican form of government;

Whereas the success of the American experiment requires

that our Nation’s children—the future of its heritage and

participants in its governance—have a firm knowledge of

its principles and history; and

Whereas the limited nature of government is the fundamental

American concept of governance, because our system is

based on the belief that power is granted by our Creator

to the citizen who then voluntarily loans power to the

state and because, as the Declaration of Independence

states, ‘‘all men . . . are endowed by their Creator with

certain unalienable Rights’’: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that—

3 (1) State and local governments and local edu4 cational agencies are encouraged to dedicate at least

5 one day of learning to the study and understanding

6 of the significance of the Declaration of Independ7 ence, the United States Constitution, and the Fed8 eralist Papers; and

9 (2) State and local governments and local edu10 cational agencies are encouraged to include a re11 quirement that, before receiving a certificate or di12 ploma of graduation from high school, students be

13 tested on their competency in understanding the
3

•SCON 37 IS

1 Declaration of Independence, the United States Con2 stitution, and the Federalist Papers.

Æ
----

----

**EXHIBIT        32.1**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|  | (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. |
|--|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| November                  1, 2005 | /s/                  Paul                  Roszel                                         |
|-----------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                              | Paul                  Roszel                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
|                              | President,                  Chief Executive 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
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.
 By:
    
    /s/ MATTHEW A. JONESName:
    
    Matthew A. JonesTitle:
    
    Chief Financial Officer of the Managing General PartnerDate:
    
    November 12, 2010
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)








In
connection with the Annual Report of Presstek, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the period ended January 2, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffrey Jacobson, Chairman,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, 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 the Company.


March
      24, 2010
            /s/
      Jeffrey JacobsonJeffrey
      Jacobson
              Chairman,
      President and Chief Executive Officer
              (Principal
      Executive Officer)





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Presstek, Inc. and will be retained by Presstek, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
July 9, 2015

Mr. Christopher Wiegand

6815 Pemberton Drive

Dallas, TX 75230

Dear Mr. Wiegand:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your July 1st 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

2677), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.
2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Nicholas Alberico, Defendant.

County Court, Oneida County,

March 16, 1959.

*336
      *Sal J. Eannace*for defendant.

*John M. Liddy, District Attorney (Arthur A. Darrigrand*of counsel), for plaintiff.

John J. Walsh, J.

The defendant was indicted by the January Grand Jury on a felony indictment together with a recommendation that he be treated as a youthful offender. Upon his preliminary appearance before the court, he declined to execute his consent to be so treated upon the ground that he would thereby be waiving any right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence before the Grand Jury. Instead, he interposed a motion to inspect the' Grand Jury minutes. Although the District Attorney did not oppose the application, neither he, nor defense counsel were able to cite any specific reported case on the matter. The court orally granted the application to the extent of ordering the Grand Jury minutes to be examined by the court to determine the sufficiency of the evidence, since the said defendant had been discharged by the committing Magistrate on a preliminary examination, and was ordered held merely as a material witness in the case. At the same time, the court announced its intention to submit a memorandum opinion of the reasons which prompted the decision.

Research discloses that this precise question was passed upon with the same result in the case of *People*v. *Brower*by Judge Farrell in Queens County Court. In a most logical and clear opinion (16 Misc 2d 293), the court held that neither the fact that the indictment is held in abeyance, nor that it is sealed as to the public, nor that defendant has executed a consent to be treated as a youthful offender (Code Grim. Pro., §§ 913-e, 913-f, 913-g, subd. 3) should destroy any of the rights of the defendant.

The court said in part (p. 295):

> “ If established practices and procedures for the carrying out of the salutary purposes of the youthful offender law are found to be at variance with the exercise of the fundamental rights of the accused, they should yield to those rights and be made to conform with their preservation.”

> ‘ ‘ If the indictment is without lawful support, so is the entire resulting proceeding. Reason rejects the proposition that the Legislature intended to preclude the accused from questioning

*337the justice of the indictment which he is held to answer, until his eligibility for a treatment (which may be wholly ■unwarranted in the first place) shall have been determined. Authority indicates that any such legislative assumption of power to curtail his right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence on which he is held for trial, would be vain and ineffective. *(People*v. *Nitzberg,*289 N. Y. 523, 529-531; cf., also, *People*v. *Van Allen,*275 App. Div. 181, 184-187 [Third Dept.]) ” (p. 294).
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2433 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain footwear. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. BROWNBACK 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 certain 

footwear. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN FOOTWEAR. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.22.48 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 certain footwear) is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/2009’’ 

7 and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

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

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


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2433 IS

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

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 16

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Government National Mortgage

Association guaranty fee should not be increased to provide increased

revenues or the Federal Government to offset other expenditures.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 5, 1999

Mr. GRAMS (for himself and Mr. GORTON) submitted the following concurrent

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing,

and Urban Affairs

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Government

National Mortgage Association guaranty fee should not

be increased to provide increased revenues or the Federal

Government to offset other expenditures.

Whereas the Government National Mortgage Association,

known as Ginnie Mae, was established as a wholly owned

corporation of the United States to facilitate the worldwide sale of investment securities backed by mortgages

insured or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) or the Veterans Administration (VA),

which is now the Department of Veterans Affairs;

Whereas Ginnie Mae assesses a fee to lenders issuing such

securities and notes for the guaranty, by Ginnie Mae, of
2

SCON 16 IS

the timely payment to investors of principal and interest

of the securities and notes;

Whereas the guaranty fee currently charged by Ginnie Mae,

at a rate of 6 basis points, has produced significant net

revenue for the Federal Government each year;

Whereas Ginnie Mae is actuarially sound and its reserves are

sufficient to protect the taxpayers of the United States

from any loss;

Whereas the cost of home ownership is increasing, thereby

making the dream of home ownership unattainable for

many families in the United States;

Whereas FHA and VA loans are used primarily by first-time

and minority homeowners to achieve the dream of home

ownership;

Whereas Congress should seek to eliminate barriers to affordable housing and reduce the costs of home ownership;

and

Whereas proposals to increase the Ginnie Mae guaranty fee

above the current rate, if enacted, would constitute a tax

on home ownership, would increase the costs of owning

a home, and would ultimately deny many Americans the

opportunity to own a home: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that any

3 increase in the guaranty fee assessed by the Government

4 National Mortgage Association above the rate currently in

5 effect constitutes an unnecessary and unwarranted tax on

6 home ownership that cannot be justified as sound public

7 policy or as necessary for financial soundness of the Gov-
3

SCON 16 IS

1 ernment National Mortgage Association and, therefore,

2 should not be used to provide increased revenues or the

3 Federal Government to offset other expenditures.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE
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 KeyOn Communications Holdings, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Jonathan Snyder, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to my 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
 19, 2009 | By: | /s/ Jonathan
 Snyder          
|                       |     |                               
|                       |     | Jonathan
 Snyder              
|                       |     | Chief
 Executive Officer      
|                       |     | (Principal
 Executive Officer)

---
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

# AGENCY:

                        National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health                               ( print page 15760)                            (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

HHS gives notice concerning the final effect of the HHS decision to designate a class of employees from the Linde Ceramics Plant in Tonawanda, New York, as an addition to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. On February 2, 2012, as provided for under 42 U.S.C. 7384q(b), the Secretary of HHS designated the following class of employees as an addition to the SEC:

All Atomic Weapons Employees who worked in any area at the Linde Ceramics Plant in Tonawanda, New York, from November 1, 1947, through December 31, 1953, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees included in the SEC.

This designation became effective on March 3, 2012, as provided for under 42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C). Hence, beginning on March 3, 2012, members of this class of employees, defined as reported in this notice, became members of the SEC.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Director, Division of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 877-222-7570. Information requests can also be submitted by email to                         *DCAS@CDC.GOV*.                    

John Howard,

Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

[FR Doc. 2012-6473 Filed 3-15-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE
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 KeyOn Communications Holdings, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Jonathan Snyder, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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: | May 16, 2011 | By:                            | /s/ Jonathan
 Snyder    
|      |              |                                |                         
|      |              |                                | Jonathan
 Snyder        
|      |              |                                | Chief
 Executive Officer
|      |              | (Principal
 Executive Officer)

---
#### Connie JENNINGS v. STATE of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES, OFFICE OF FAMILY SECURITY, EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH and State of Louisiana, Office of Risk Management.

No. 87-C-0667.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 23, 1987.

In re Jennings, Connie; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CA-86-0842; Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court, Div. “E”, No. 280-474.

Prior report: La.App., 503 So.2d 1198.

Denied.

DENNIS, J., would grant the writ.