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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-37,984]

Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation was initiated on July 24, 2000, in response to a petition filed on the same date on behalf of workers at Nippers Workshop, Inc., Benton, Illinois.

                    The Department of Labor has been unable to locate an official of the company to provide the information necessary to render a trade adjustment assistance determination. Consequently, the Department of Labor cannot conduct an investigation to make a determination as to whether the workers are eligible for adjustment assistance benefits under the Trade Act of 1974. Therefore, further investigation in this                           ( print page 64258)                        matter would serve no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.                

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 6th day of October 2000.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. 00-27573  Filed 10-25-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-2923

_____________________________

MICHAEL JAMES SPILLMAN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

James M. Colaw, Judge.

January 19, 2024

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED.

ROBERTS, KELSEY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Michael James Spillman, pro se, Appellant.
2

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 25, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 63846]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27319]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Title and OMB Number: Central Contractor Registration (CCR); OMB 
Number 0704-0400.
    Type of Request: Revision.
    Number of Respondents: 300,000.
    Responses Per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 300,000.
    Average Burden Per Response: 0.5 hours.
    Annual Burden Hours: 150,000.
    Needs and Uses: The Central Registration (CCR) provides a single 
point of entry for vendors that want to do business with the Department 
of Defense. As of June 1, 1998, both current and potential DoD vendors 
are required to register in the CCR in order to do business with the 
DoD if the contract solicitation occurred after May 31, 1998. Vendors 
are required to complete a one-time registration to provide basic 
information relevant to procurement and financial transactions. Vendors 
must update or renew their registration annually to maintain active 
status. The CCR validates the vendor's information and electronically 
shares the secure and encrypted data with the Defense Finance and 
Accounting Service (DFAS) to facilitate paperless payments through 
electronic funds transfer (EFT). Additionally, CCR shares the data with 
several government procurement and electronic business systems.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit; not-for-profit 
institutions.
    Frequency: On occasion and annually.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain and retain benefits.
    OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Lewis W. Oleinick.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Mr. Oleinick at the Office of Management 
and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD (Acquisition), Room 10236, New 
Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    DOD Clearance Officer Mr. Robert Cushing.
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Mr. Cushing, WHS/DIOR, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302.

    Dated: October 19, 2000.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 00-27319 Filed 10-24-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-10-M
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-22-00274-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 360th District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 360-703239-21

Before Birdwell, Bassel, and Womack, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

OCTAVIOUS WILLIAMS, JR., Appellant

V.

PAYTON WILLIAMS, Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

On July 13, 2022, and July 28, 2022, we notified Appellant, in accordance with 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless 

Appellant paid the $205 filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 44.3. Appellant has

not done so. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

Because Appellant has not complied with a procedural requirement and the 

Texas Supreme Court’s order of August 28, 2015,1 we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

Appellant must pay all costs of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: August 18, 2022

1

See Supreme Court of Tex., Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the 

Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, Misc. Docket 

No. 15-9158 (Aug. 28, 2015) (listing courts of appeals’ fees).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6832

TERENCE CLEMENTS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior

District Judge. (CA-05-29-JLK-MFU)

Submitted: November 18, 2005 Decided: April 12, 2006

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terence Clements, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Bidwell Theisen,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Terence Clements, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the

district court’s order dismissing his petition filed under 28

U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Clements has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.02


                            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 Annual Report of IQ Biometrix, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned certifies, 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.



March 31, 2004

                                                     /s/ Michael Walsh
                                                     -----------------------
                                                     Michael Walsh
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
Kirrane, Ellen 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Ellen and others: 

Bruce Lanphear [bpl3@sfu.ca] 

Monday, February 24, 2014 5:27PM 

Kirrane, Ellen 

Richard Hornung (Rick); Patel, Molini 

Re: Conference call and follow-up 

I am available on March 4th from 7:08 am to 9:88 am PT (I am assuming you meant 18:08 am to 

12:00 pm ET, right?). 

We did verify that we inadvertently switched full-scale IQ with performance IQ. We also 

verified that it didn't change the primary results. 

Rick can make sure we use the correct data. 

Best regards, 

Bruce
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit 

__________________________ 

THE PAW WASH, LLC, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

PAW PLUNGER, LLC, 

Defendant-Appellant, 

__________________________ 

2012-1240 

__________________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Western District of Missouri in case no. 08-CV-0113, 

Judge Gary A. Fenner. 

__________________________ 

Decided: December 14, 2012 

__________________________ 

RICHARD L. BROPHY, Armstrong Teasdale, LLP, of St 

Louis, Missouri, argued for plaintiff-appellee. With him 

on the brief was JENNIFER E. HOEKEL. 

DAVID L. REIN, JR., Finch & Campbell, LLP, of Kansas 

City, Missouri, argued for defendant-appellant. 

__________________________ 

Before DYK, PLAGER, and CLEVENGER, Circuit Judges. 
PAW WASH v. PAW PLUNGER 2

PER CURIAM. 

In this case, based on a certain settlement agreement 

between the parties, the district court, on November 15, 

2011, issued a permanent injunction enjoining Paw 

Plunger, LLC (“Paw Plunger”) “from infringing the ‘391 

patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling 

in the United States of importing into the United States 

the ‘Paw Plunger’ and any other products that infringe 

one (1) or more claims of the ‘391 patent.” Paw Plunger 

appeals. We affirm the decision of the district court with 

one exception. The injunction granted by the district court 

should have been limited to Claim 17 of the ‘391 patent. 

Thus, the permanent injunction must be revised to read 

as follows: 

ORDERED Defendant and each of its agents affiliates, successors, servants, and employees, and 

any and all other persons or entities acting under 

Defendant’s authority, are hereby permanently 

enjoined from infringing the ‘391 patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling in the 

United States or importing into the United States 

the “Paw Plunger” and any other products that infringe Claim 17 of the ‘391 patent.

In light of this decision, we vacate the district court’s 

ruling and remand to the district court so that it may 

enter an appropriate order. 

AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED AND REMANDED 

IN PART 

COSTS

 Costs to appellee.
IB 

Union Calendar No. 477 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3227 

[Report No. 113–637] 

To remove from the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System 

certain properties in South Carolina. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 1, 2013 

Mr. RICE of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Natural Resources 

DECEMBER 1, 2014 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 

House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed 

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] 

[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on October 1, 2013] 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3227 RH

A BILL 

To remove from the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 

Resources System certain properties in South Carolina. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3227 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. REMOVAL OF PROPERTIES IN SOUTH CAROLINA 

4 FROM JOHN H. CHAFEE COASTAL BARRIER 

5 RESOURCES SYSTEM. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—The map subtitled ‘‘Huntington 

7 Beach Unit SC–03’’ included in the sets of maps entitled 

8 ‘‘Coastal Barrier Resources System’’ referred to in section 

9 4(a) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 

10 3503(a)) and relating to the Huntington Beach Unit in 

11 South Carolina is hereby replaced by another map relating 

12 to the same unit entitled ‘‘John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 

13 Resources System Corrected Huntington Beach Unit SC– 

14 03’’ dated September 30, 2014. 

15 (b) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary of the Interior shall 

16 keep each map revised under subsection (a) on file and 

17 available for inspection in accordance with section 4(b) of 

18 the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(b)). 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 477 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3227 

[Report No. 113–637] 

A BILL 

To remove from the John H. Chafee Coastal BarSouth Carolina. rier Resources System certain properties in 

DECEMBER 1, 2014 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Comand ordered to be printed mittee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





In connection with the Annual Report on 10-K of Tongli Pharmaceuticals (USA), Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Mingli Yao, principal executive officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Date:  July 14, 2011





By:
/s/ Mingli Yao


Name: Mingli Yao


Title: Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)











This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         292,219
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,360,228
<ALLOWANCES>                                    35,091
<INVENTORY>                                  1,043,637
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,769,459
<PP&E>                                       2,430,794
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,159,561)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,040,692
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,164,816
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,063,149
<COMMON>                                     2,998,685
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,040,692
<SALES>                                      6,779,132
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,779,132
<CGS>                                        3,816,515
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,816,515
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,125,920
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,169
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (194,868)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (194,868)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (194,868)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1











                        ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE


                              Officer's Certificate



I, Paul D. Payne, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of
Mercedes-Benz Credit Corporation (MBCC), a Delaware corporation, in its capacity
as Servicer of the receivables under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement ("the
Agreement") among Daimler-Benz Vehicle Receivables Corporation and Citibank
N.A., as trustee, dated November 1, 1995, hereby certify as follows:

(a)  a review of the activities of MBCC, the Servicer under the Agreement, for
     the period January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1997 and of the performance
     of its obligations under the Agreement has been made under my supervision;
     and

(b)  to the best of my knowledge, based upon such review, the Servicer has
     fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period.


Dated: March 2, 1998


/s/ Paul D. Payne
-----------------



                             Page 10 of 10 Pages
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
129489 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan CAROLYN SPILLER, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 129489 COA: 253502 WCAC: 03-000051 UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 9, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0120 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.

January 27, 2006

Clerk
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-10340 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FREDERICK BUCHANAN, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:96-CR-132-A-ALL

- - - - - - - - - - December 17, 1997 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Frederick Buchanan appeals his conviction for distribution of cocaine base pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). He argues that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support a conviction. The district court did not err in refusing to grant Buchanan’s motion for judgment of acquittal. The evidence was sufficient to support his conviction, as a reasonable trier of fact could have found that the evidence established his guiltbeyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Gonzalez , 76

F.3d 1339, 1346 (5th Cir. 1996). AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 32(ii)**

**CERTIFICATION**

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

In connect
with the quarterly report of Taylor Devices, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB
for the period ended November 30, 2006 to be filed with Securities and Exchange
Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark V. McDonough,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 as of the dates
and for the periods covered by the Report.

It is not
intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

|Date: January 12, 2007 | By: | /s/ Mark V. McDonough                     
|---------------------- | --- | ------------------------------------------
|                       |     | Mark V. McDonough, Chief Financial
Officer
[Anderson Associates, LLP Letterhead]







     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
of BCSB Bankcorp,  Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-53295,  File No. 333-85025 and
File No.  333-87932) of our report dated  December 16, 2002 on our audits of the
consolidated  financial  statements of BCSB  Bankcorp,  Inc. as of September 30,
2002 and 2001,  and for each of the two years in the period ended  September 30,
2002, which report has been  incorporated by reference in BCSB Bankcorp,  Inc.'s
Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended  September  30, 2002 filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission  pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934.


                                        /s/ Anderson Associates, LLP


Baltimore, Maryland
December 30, 2002