alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Jamarr Rashaun Johnson, Plaintiff, V. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Civil Action No. Federal Bureau ofPrisons et al., ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

# FILED JUN 2 12012 Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts forthe District of Columbia 

# 12 1016

This matter is before the Court on its initial review ofplaintiffsprose complaint and application to proceed informapauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed pursuantto 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (requiring dismissal ofa prisoner's complaintupon
a determination that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which reliefmay be granted). Plaintiffis a prisoner at the Federal Correctional Center in Coleman, Florida, suing under the Privacy Act, 5U.S.C. § 552a. Plaintiffalleges that his inmate central file contains inaccurate information that has adversely affected his custody. He seeks $20,000 in damages, "amendment ofhis records in [his] inmate central file," and his "Return back to general population." Compl. at 6. In additionto the Bureau ofPrisons ("BOP"), plaintiffhas named his warden and three other**employe~s** athis facility as defendants. Because only federal agencies are subjectto suit underthe Privacy Act, "no cause ofaction exists that would entitle [plaintiff] to relieffrom [the named individual defendants] underthe Privacy Act
...." Martinez v. Bureau of Prisons, 444 F.3d 620, 624 (D.C. Cir. 2006).Plaintiffsclaim against BOP fails because BOP has exempted its Inmate Central Record System from the Privacy Act's accuracy and amendment requirements (subsections (d) and (e)(5)). 28 C.F.R. § 16.97(a)(4); White v. UnitedStates Probation Office, 148 F.3d 1124, 1125 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (per curiam) ("Underregulations
...presentence reports and BOP inmate records systems are exempt from the amendment provisions ofthe Act"); see Martinez, 444 F.3d at 624 ("The BOP has exempted its Inmate Central Record System from the accuracy provisions ofthePrivacy Act[.]") (citations omitted). And "[h]aving exempted its records from the substantive provision regarding the agency's record keeping obligations, BOP effectively deprives litigants ofa remedy for any harm caused by the agency's substandard recordkeeping." Ramirezv. Dep 't of Justice, 594 F. Supp. 2d 58, 65 (D.D.C. 2009), aff'd, No. 10-5016, 2010 WL 4340408 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 19, 2010) (per curiam); see Lopez v. Huff, 508 F. Supp. 2d 71, 77 (D.D.C. 2007) ("To the extent that plaintiffis seeking to have his [presentence investigation report] amended, such reliefis not available because the BOP has properly exempted its inmate central files, where such documents are kept, from the [Privacy Act's] amendment requirements.") (citations omitted). A separate Order ofdismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. 

# l/L__ 

# S J)vJL United States DistrictJudge DATE:

## June~, 2012

2
Exhibit 32.1  Section 1350 Certification  In connection with the quarterly report of Lotus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Liu Zhong Yi, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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 result of operations of the Company.  August 10, 2009
        /s/ Zhongyi Liu
 Zhongyi Liu, CEO and President, principal executive officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

GMH COMMUNITIES TRUST

 

CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY

RULE 13a-14(a) OF THESECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

I, Bradley W. Harris, Senior Vice Presidentand Chief Financial Officer of GMH Communities Trust, a Maryland real estateinvestment trust (the “Company”), hereby certify that, to my knowledge:

 

(1)                                  The Company’speriodic report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the “Form 10-Q”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)                                  The informationcontained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

*             *             *

 

 
| /s/ Bradley W. Harris       |   |
|-----------------------------|--------|
| Bradley W. Harris           |
| Senior Vice President       |
| and Chief Financial Officer |
|                        |
|                        |
| Date: August 12, 2005  |

 

----
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**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 Down Holding Trust (the
      " **Registrant** "),
      as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      " **Quarterly**  **Report** "),
      I,
      Samuel Masucci, III, principal executive 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/
      Samuel Masucci, III


Samuel
      Masucci, III


On
      behalf
      of the Registrant


and
      as
      Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT
32.2










CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Index Oil and Gas Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the “Report”),
I, Andrew Boetius, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and





(2)           The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.






Date:
      November 14, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Andrew
      BoetiusAndrew
      BoetiusChief
      Financial Officer
Entrustment Letter




Entrustment Letter







Trustor:

The Project Team of the Key Research Project - Kindergarten Bilingual Education and Teachers’ Training - of the Tenth Five-Year Plan of the Ministry of Education (the “Team”)




Trustee:

Today’s Teachers Technology and Culture Ltd. (“TTTC”)




The Team entrusts TTTC for the development of audio, video materials and learning tools, and the manufacturing and sales of related products for the kindergarten English thematic education curriculum of the key research project - Kindergarten Bilingual Education and Teachers’ Training - of the Tenth Five-Year Plan of the Ministry of Education (the “Works”). The parties (the “Parties”) agree as follows:




1.

The Team entrusts TTTC for development of the learning tools and the manufacturing of related products of the Works.




(1).

The Team is responsible for providing scientific and rigorous education contents or guidance for the products; 




(2).

The Team is responsible for promoting the products within the area of the kindergarten bilingual project;




(3).

The Team is responsible for organizing experts to appraise the products.




2.

TTTC accepted and promised to complete the Works as follows:




(1).

TTTC is responsible for the earlier stage development, design and trial of the learning tool products;




(2).

TTTC is responsible for the manufacturing of the products;




(3).

TTTC is responsible for drawing up the price standard and sales plan of the products based on consultation with the Team;




(4).

TTTC is responsible for providing the startup fund for the products to the Team in the amount of RMB100,000 yuan, payable in two installments (RMB50,000 each). The first payment shall be made to the Team within ten days following the execution of this entrustment letter, and the balance shall be paid by the end of March 2005;




(5).

The parties shall have a separate agreement for the distribution the profits from the products sales.




3.

The Team has the right to supervise TTTC’s implementation of the Works.




4.

TTTC has the responsibility to report the Works to the Team on a regular basis.




5.

The entrustment letter is effective from the date both parties have duly executed.







The Team:

Signature and Seal on March 26, 2003




TTTC:

Signature and Seal on April 2, 2003
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19004-19005]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7600]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XA915


Marine Mammals; File No. 16621

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of permit.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a permit has been issued to 
Alejandro Acevedo-Guti[eacute]rrez, Ph.D., Biology Department, Western 
Washington University, Bellingham, WA to conduct research on harbor 
seals (Phoca vitulina).

ADDRESSES: The permit and related documents are available for review 
upon written request or by appointment in the following offices:
    Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, 
NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; 
phone (301) 427-8401; fax (301) 713-0376; and Northwest Region, NMFS, 
7600 Sand Point Way NE., BIN C15700, Bldg. 1, Seattle, WA 98115-0700; 
phone (206) 526-6150; fax (206) 526-6426.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tammy Adams or Joselyd Garcia-Reyes, 
(301) 427-8401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 4, 2012, notice was published in 
the Federal Register (76 FR 45514) that a request for a permit to 
conduct research on harbor seals in Washington State, had been 
submitted by the above-named applicant. The requested permit has been 
issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and the regulations governing the 
taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).
    The permit authorizes harassment of harbor seals in Washington 
State inland waters of the Salish Sea. The research involves ground 
surveys, vessel surveys, and playback experiments. The permit expires 
on March 15, 2017.
    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), a final determination has been made that the 
activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to 
prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.


[[Page 19005]]


    Dated: March 21, 2012.
Tammy C. Adams,
Acting Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-7600 Filed 3-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 63 (Monday, April 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 19718]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7795]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-81,045]


Dow Jones & Company, Inc., Dow Jones Content Services Including 
On-Site Workers From Aerotek, Inc., Princeton, NJ; Amended 
Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 
(``Act''), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a 
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance 
on January 26, 2012, applicable to workers of Aerotek, Inc., working 
on-site at Dow Jones Corporation, Dow Jones Content Services Princeton, 
New Jersey. The workers are engaged in activities related to the 
production of digital newsletters. The notice was published in the 
Federal Register on February 8, 2012 (77 FR 6590).
    At the request of the New Jersey State agency, the Department 
reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. New 
information shows that workers of the Princeton, New Jersey location of 
Dow Jones & Company, Dow Jones Content Services, including on-site 
workers from Aerotek were engaged in activities supporting the 
production of digital newsletters, both experienced worker separations 
during the relevant time period due to the shift in the production of 
digital newsletters to Sophia, Bulgaria.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to 
include workers of the Princeton, New Jersey location of Dow Jones & 
Company, Inc., Dow Jones Content Services.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-81,045 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers from Dow Jones & Company, Inc., Dow Jones Content 
Services, including on-site workers from Aerotek, Princeton, New 
Jersey, who became totally or partially separated from employment on 
or after February 13, 2010, through January 26, 2014, and all 
workers in the group threatened with total or partial separation 
from employment on date of certification through two years from the 
date of certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act of 1074, as 
amended.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 22nd day of March 2012.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2012-7795 Filed 3-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 74652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29079]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Acquisition Regulations System

48 CFR Parts 204 and 252

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Technical 
Amendments

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense 
(DoD).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: DoD is making technical amendments to the Defense Federal 
Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to provide needed editorial 
changes.

DATES: Effective December 16, 2014

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Manuel Quinones, Defense 
Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), Room 3B941, 
3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060. Telephone 571-372-
6088; facsimile 571-372-6094.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule amends the DFARS as follows:
    1. Directs contracting officers to additional procedures and 
guidance by adding references to DFARS Procedures, Guidance, and 
Information PGI 204.7303 at DFARS 204.7302 and 204.7303. The existing 
DFARS 204.7303 is renumbered as 204.7304.
    2. Updates the clause prescription reference at 252.204-7012.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 204 and 252

    Government procurement.

Manuel Quinones,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 204 and 252 are amended as follows:

0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 204 and 252 continues to 
read as follows:

    Authority:  41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

PART 204--ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

204.7302  [Amended]

0
2. Amend section 204.7302 in paragraph (b)(2) by removing ``assessing 
contractor compliance'' and adding ``assessing contractor compliance 
(see PGI 204.7303-3(a)(2))'' in its place.

0
3. Revise section 204.7303 to read as follows:

204.7303  Procedures.

    Follow the procedures relating to safeguarding unclassified 
controlled technical information at PGI 204.7303.

0
4. Add section 204.7304 to read as follows:

204.7304  Contract clause.

    Use the clause at 252.204-7012, Safeguarding of Unclassified 
Controlled Technical Information, in all solicitations and contracts, 
including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for 
the acquisition of commercial items.

PART 252--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

252.204-7012  [Amended]

0
5. Amend section 252.204-7012 by removing, in the introductory text, 
``As prescribed in 204.7303'' and adding ``As prescribed in 204.7304'' 
in its place.

[FR Doc. 2014-29079 Filed 12-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
```
#### In Re MARRIAGE OF Mary J. HAHN, Appellee and Cross-Appellant, and Robert E. Hahn, Appellant and Cross-Appellee.

No. 79CA0982.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I.

April 9, 1981.

*176Ellison, Ward & McCrea, James R. Clifton, Denver, for appellee and cross-appellant.

Hornbein, MacDonald, Fattor & Buckley, P. C., James C. Fattor, Denver, for appellant and cross-appellee.

STERNBERG, Judge.

The husband appeals from the trial court’s judgment requiring payment of maintenance under a separation agreement incorporated into the dissolution decree to his former wife after her remarriage. She cross-appeals the trial court’s denial of her request for attorneys’ fees and costs. We affirm.

When the marriage of the parties was dissolved, the parties executed a separation ¿greement which was incorporated in the decree. It provided for payment of maintenance for 20 months, and, thereafter, on a reduced basis for another 90 months. The maintenance provision states: “These payments will not be subject to modification for any reason except the death of the wife.”

Upon the wife’s remarriage some 15 months after the dissolution, the husband ceased payment of maintenance, and thereafter, the wife brought this action. The trial court ordered the husband to pay ar-rearages and to continue monthly payments; however, it denied the wife’s request for attorneys fees and costs.

Section 14-10-122(2), C.R.S.1973, provides:

> “Unless otherwise agreed in writing or expressly provided in the decree, the obligation to pay future maintenance is terminated upon the death of either party or the remarriage of the party receiving maintenance.”

Language of similar import has been construed to require an express provision that alimony continue after remarriage. *Spratlen v. Spratlen,*30 Colo.App. 91, 491 P.2d 608 (1971). In our view, the quoted language of the separation agreement is such an express provision. Although it does not explicitly provide for continuation or termination of maintenance in the event of remarriage, nevertheless, it indicates that it was the contemplation of the parties that only the wife’s death would absolve the husband of liability for payment of maintenance. Consequently, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

We also disagree with the wife’s contention that she is entitled to attorney’s fees. The awarding of attorneys fees is discretionary with the trial court, and its ruling thereon will not be disturbed on review if supported by the evidence. *In Re Marriage of Icke,*35 Colo.App. 60, 530 P.2d 1001 (1974), *aff’d,*189 Colo. 319, 540 P.2d 1076 (1975). In awarding attorneys fees, the trial court may take into account the financial resources of both parties. *In Re Marriage of Parker,*41 Colo.App. 287, 584 P.2d 103 (1978). Here, the record indicates the wife was self-supporting and had sufficient income to pay her own attorneys’ fees.

Judgment affirmed.

COYTE and BERMAN, JJ., concur.
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2011-0644 Directorate Identifier: 2010-NM-265-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update 

accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Access wing center

section and perform

detailed inspection

and High

Frequency Eddy

Current Inspection

of spanwise beams

numbers 1, 2 and 3

for cracks

50.0 $4,250.0

0

$0 $4,250.00 160 $680,000.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $680,000

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs 

table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): N/A
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain

for either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements 

for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
**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 Hawk Corporation (the“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period endingDecember 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Joseph J. Levanduski, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to18 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 ofsection 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and     (2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company./s/ JOSEPH J. LEVANDUSKI Joseph J. Levanduski