alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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 May 9, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-11183 Summary Calendar

BRUCE WAYNE HOUSER, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus DOUG DRETKE, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 7:03-CV-239-R

-------------------- Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Bruce Wayne Houser, Texas prisoner 460890, filed the instant 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition to challenge a prison disciplinary conviction. The district court dismissed the petition pursuant
to FED . R. C IV . P. 41(b) for want of prosecution. Houser now appeals that decision in accordance with this court’s grant of a certificate of appealability on the issue whether the district court abused its discretion in dismissing his § 2254 petition. Houser contends that he did his best to comply with the districtNo. 04-11183 -2- court’s order directing him to fill out a questionnaire and that the district court erred in dismissing his suit. We review the district court’s dismissal under Rule 41(b) for abuse of discretion. Link v. Wabash R.R. Co. , 370 U.S. 626, 633 (1962); McNeal v. Papasan , 842 F.2d 787, 789-90 (5th Cir. 1988). When reviewing a dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(b), we will find an abuse of discretion unless there is a clear record of delay or “contumacious” conduct by the plaintiff and the district court has expressly determined that lesser sanctions would not prompt diligent prosecution, or the record shows that the district court employed lesser sanctions that proved to be futile. Berry v. CIGNA/RSI-CIGNA, 975 F.2d 1188, 1191 (5th Cir. 1992). The district court abused its discretion in dismissing Houser’s suit. There is no clear record of delay or contumacious conduct in this case. See Berry , 975 F.2d at 1191 n.6; cf. Harrelson v. United States , 613 F.2d 114, 116 (5th Cir. 1980); see also Morris v. Ocean Systems, Inc. , 730 F.2d 248, 252 (5th Cir. 1984). The district court also erred by not considering lesser sanctions before dismissing Houser’s suit. See Berry , 975 F.2d at 1191. Consequently, the judgment of the district court is VACATED, and this case is REMANDED for further proceedings.
```

[Federal Register: September 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 183)]
[Notices]               
[Page 57828-57829]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22se10-122]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

 
Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; 
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Flight 
Engineers and Flight Navigators

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA 
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information 
collection. Information collected is used to determine certification 
eligibility of Flight Engineers and Flight Navigators.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by November 22, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Scott on (202) 267-9895, or by 
e-mail at: Carla.Scott@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 2120-0007.
    Title: Flight Engineers and Flight Navigators.
    Form Numbers: FAA Form 8400-3.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: FAA Form 8400-3, Application for an Airman Certificate 
and/or Rating (for flight engineer and flight navigator) and 
applications for approval of related training courses are submitted to 
FAA for evaluation. The information is reviewed to determine applicant 
eligibility and compliance with prescribed provisions of FAR Part

[[Page 57829]]

63, Certification: Flight Crewmembers Other Than Pilots.
    Respondents: Approximately 1,036 flight engineers and flight 
navigators.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 505 hours.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Carla 
Scott, Room 712, Federal Aviation Administration, IT Enterprises 
Business Services Division, AES-200, 800 Independence Ave., SW., 
Washington, DC 20591.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of 
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the 
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the 
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d) 
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of 
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include 
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information 
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC on September 15, 2010.
Carla Scott,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business 
Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. 2010-23634 Filed 9-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 2340]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-678]


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

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

[Docket No. SSA-2012-0003]


Occupational Information Development Advisory Panel

AGENCY: Social Security Administration (SSA).

ACTION: Notice of the Charter Renewal for the Occupational Information 
Development Advisory Panel.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that on January 6, 2012; our 
Commissioner renewed the Charter for the Occupational Information 
Development Advisory Panel (Panel). This discretionary Panel will 
provide independent advice and recommendations on plans and activities 
to create an occupational information system (OIS) tailored 
specifically for our disability programs and adjudicative needs. We 
require advice and recommendations on the use of occupational 
information in our disability programs and the research design of the 
OIS, including the development and testing of an OIS content model and 
taxonomy, work analysis instrumentation, sampling, and data collection 
and analysis.
    Membership includes professionals from academia, private sector, 
and public entities, (e.g., Department of Labor) with expertise in one 
or more of the following subject areas: (a) Occupational analysis, 
design and development of occupational classifications, instrument 
design, labor market economics, sampling, data collection and analyses; 
(b) disability evaluation, vocational rehabilitation, forensic 
vocational assessment, and physical or occupational therapy; (c) 
occupational or physical rehabilitation medicine, psychiatry, or 
psychology; and (d) disability claimant advocacy.
    The Panel will function solely as an advisory body and in 
compliance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. 
The charter was filed with the appropriate congressional committees.
    For further information contact, Ms. Leola S. Brooks, Designated 
Federal Officer, Occupational Information Development Advisory Panel, 
Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard 3-E-26 Richard 
Ball Building, Baltimore, MD 21235-0001. Fax to (410) 597-0825, or 
Email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#83cccac7c2d3c3f0f0e2ade4ecf5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="551a1c111405152626347b323a23">[email protected]</span></a>.

Leola S. Brooks,
Designated Federal Officer, Occupational Information Development 
Advisory Panel.
[FR Doc. 2012-678 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191-02-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**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 for the three months period
      ended March 31, 2007 of the Claymore MACROshares Oil Up Holding Trust (the " **Registrant** " ),
      as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the " **Quarterly**  **Report** " ),
      I,
      Steven M. Hill, principal financial officer of MACRO Securities Depositor,
      LLC,
      which acts as the depositor for the Registrant (the " **Depositor** " ),
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




1.
            The
                Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly represents,
                in all
                material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
                of the
                Registrant.






Date:
      May
      15, 2007




/s/
      Steven M. Hill


Steven
      M.
      Hill


On
      behalf
      of the Registrant


and
      as
      Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 386 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 386

  Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding National Pearl Harbor 
                            Remembrance Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            December 7 (legislative day, September 22), 2000

Mr. Smith of New Hampshire (for himself, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Helms, and Mr. 
 Inhofe) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding National Pearl Harbor 
                            Remembrance Day.

Whereas on December 7, 1941, the Imperial Japanese Navy and Air Force attacked 
        units of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed at Pearl 
        Harbor, Hawaii;
Whereas 2,403 members of the Armed Forces of the United States were killed in 
        the attack on Pearl Harbor;
Whereas there are currently more than 12,000 members of the Pearl Harbor 
        Survivors Association;
Whereas the 60th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor will be on December 
        7, 2001;
Whereas on August 23, 1994, Public Law 103-308 was enacted, designating December 
        7 of each year as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day;
Whereas Public Law 103-308, reenacted as section 129 of title 36, United States 
        Code, requests the President to issue a proclamation each year calling 
        on the people of the United States to observe National Pearl Harbor 
        Remembrance Day with appropriate ceremonies and activities, and for all 
        departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of the Federal Government, 
        and interested organizations, groups, and individuals, to fly the flag 
        of the United States at half-staff each December 7 in honor of the 
        individuals who died as a result of their service at Pearl Harbor;
Whereas many citizens remain unaware of National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day; 
        and
Whereas many Federal offices do not lower their flags to half-staff each 
        December 7: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
    (1) pays tribute to the citizens of the United States who died in 
the attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941, and to the 
members of the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association; and
    (2) urges the President to take more active steps--
            (A) to inform the American public of the existence of 
        National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day; and
            (B) to ensure that the flag of the United States is flown 
        at half-staff in accordance with section 129 of title 36, 
        United States Code.
                                 <all>
```
Star Maritime Acquisition Corp.
                           c/o Schwartz & Weiss, P.C.
                               457 Madison Avenue
                            New York, New York 10022


____, 2005


Maxim Group LLC
405 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10174


         Re:  Star Maritime Acquisition Corp.


Gentlemen:


         This letter will confirm the agreement of the  undersigned  to purchase
warrants ("Warrants") of Star Maritime Acquisition Corp. ("Company") included in
the units ("Units") being sold in the Company's  initial public offering ("IPO")
upon the terms and  conditions  set forth herein.  Each Unit is comprised of one
share of Common Stock and one  Warrant.  The shares of Common Stock and Warrants
will not be separately tradable until 20 trading days after the earlier to occur
of the expiration of the underwriters'  over-allotment option or its exercise in
full unless  Maxim Group LLC  ("Maxim")  informs the Company of its  decision to
allow earlier separate trading.

         The  undersigned  agrees  that this  letter  agreement  constitutes  an
irrevocable order for Maxim to purchase  Warrants in the public  marketplace for
the  undersigned's  account  within the six month period  commencing on the date
separate  trading of the  Warrants  commences  ("Separation  Date") in an amount
equal to 1.5% of the gross  proceeds  of the  offering  at prices  not to exceed
$1.20 per Warrant on a not-held basis ("Maximum  Warrant  Purchase").  Maxim (or
such  other  broker  dealer(s)  as Maxim may assign the order to) agrees to fill
such order in such  amounts and at such times as it may  determine,  in its sole
discretion,  during the six month period commencing on the Separation Date. Each
order will be a limit  order  under  NASD rules  governing  such  orders.  Maxim
further  agrees  that it  will  not  charge  the  undersigned  any  fees  and/or
commissions with respect to such purchase obligation.

         The  undersigned  may  notify  Maxim  that  all or part of the  Maximum
Warrant  Purchase will be made by one or more  affiliates of the undersigned who
(or which) has an account  at Maxim  and,  in such  event,  Maxim will make such
purchase on behalf of said affiliate;  provided,  however,  that the undersigned
hereby  agrees to make  payment of the  purchase  price of such  purchase in the
event that the affiliate fails to make such payment.

<PAGE>

Maxim Group LLC
____, 2005
Page 2



         The  undersigned  agrees that neither the undersigned nor any affiliate
of his shall sell or transfer the  Warrants  until after the  consummation  of a
merger,  capital stock  exchange,  asset  acquisition or other similar  business
combination and acknowledges  that, at the option of Maxim, the certificates for
such  Warrants   shall  contain  a  legend   indicating   such   restriction  on
transferability.


                                       Very truly yours


                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Prokopios (Akis) Tsirigakis

                                       2
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 4, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
130699 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan STEVEN PRICE, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 130699 COA: 257577 Court of Claims: 01-018063-MT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 31, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the judgment of the Court of Appeals and we REMAND this case to the Court of Ap peals for reconsideration in light of Grimes v Dep’t of Transportation , 475 Mich 72 (2006).

C AVANAGH and K ELLY , JJ., would deny leave to appeal.

s0927 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 4, 2006

Clerk
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MARISSA HUNSBERGER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 281 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 30th day of September, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

. The Application for Leave to File Amicus Brief is also DENIED

.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 393 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 393

    Commemorating the life of Gwendolyn Brooks of Chicago, Illinois.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           December 15 (legislative day, September 22), 2000

  Mr. Durbin (for himself and Mr. Fitzgerald) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Commemorating the life of Gwendolyn Brooks of Chicago, Illinois.

Whereas Gwendolyn Brooks was born in Topeka, Kansas, on June 7, 1917, and moved 
        one month thereafter to the South Side of Chicago;
Whereas Gwendolyn Brooks was educated in the Chicago public school system, 
        graduating from Englewood High School in 1934;
Whereas Gwendolyn Brooks was the author of over twenty works of poetry spanning 
        46 years;
Whereas Gwendolyn Brooks in 1950 became the first African-American woman to win 
        the Pulitzer Prize for poetry with her publication, Annie Allen;
Whereas Gwendolyn Brooks was showered with numerous other accolades as a poet 
        and artist, including a lifetime achievement award from the National 
        Endowment for the Arts;
Whereas Gwendolyn Brooks has been poet laureate of Illinois since 1968, 
        succeeding the late Carl Sandburg;
Whereas Gwendolyn Brooks leveraged her prestige as Illinois poet laureate to 
        inspire young writers, establishing the Illinois Poet Laureate Awards in 
        1969 to encourage elementary and high school students to write; and
Whereas Gwendolyn Brooks taught future poets and writers at the University of 
        Wisconsin-Madison, the City College of New York, Columbia College of 
        Chicago, Northeastern Illinois University, Elmhurst College, and Chicago 
        State University: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
          (1) commemorates the life of Gwendolyn Brooks and celebrates 
        the accomplishments she made not just to the State of Illinois, 
        but to the entire United States of America as a poet and 
        artist; and
          (2) extends its deepest sympathies to her daughter Nora and 
        son Henry.
                                 <all>
```
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, July 17, 2015.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, July 17, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15A2133. STATE OF GEORGIA v. JENNIFER COSGROVE.

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW

THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.
EXHIBIT 32.2




        Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10Q-SB of Thai One On,
Inc. (Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Au E-Mun, Chief
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of Registrant,
hereby 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 and belief:

   (1)  the quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly
        presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of Registrant.


Date:  August 14, 2005          /s/ Au E-Mun
                              ----------------------------------
                              Chief Executive Officer of
                              Thai One On, Inc., Registrant
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 Certification of Chief Executive
Officer Pursuant to
 Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
 
 
 In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10K-SB of Rotoblock Corporation
(Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Chien Chih Liu, Chief Executive Officer, hereby 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 and
belief:
 
 (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 Registrant.
 
 
  Date: September
13,
2008 ROTOBLOCK
CORPORATION
 
 /s/ Chien
Chih Liu
 By: Chien
Chih Liu, Chief
Executive Officer
Description of Non-Executive Director Compensation



 Exhibit 10.33 
  
 Description of Non-Executive Director Compensation 
  
 On August 9, 2005, the Board of Directors of Lazard Ltd approved an arrangement for the compensation of Non-Executive
Directors that will provide them with an annual cash retainer of US $50,000 and an annual award of deferred stock units (“DSUs”) with a grant value of US $50,000. The Chair of the Audit Committee shall be paid an additional annual retainer
of US $30,000 and the Chairs of each of the Nominating & Governance Committee and the Compensation Committee shall be paid an additional annual retainer US $20,000, in each case to be paid 50% in cash and 50% in DSUs. Each of the other
members of the Audit Committee shall be paid an additional annual retainer of US $20,000 and each of the other members of the Nominating & Governance Committee and the Compensation Committee shall be paid an additional annual retainer of US
$15,000, in each case to be paid 50% in cash and 50% in DSUs. All DSUs awarded under this arrangement will be (i) issued under the Lazard Ltd 2005 Equity Incentive Plan or any successor plan thereto, and (ii) converted to Lazard
Class A common stock, par value $0.01 per share, and distributed to the Director in accordance with the vesting schedule determined by the Nominating & Governance Committee.