alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 6217]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2755]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special 
Emphasis Panel, SBIR--``Measurement Modules for Prevention 
Interventions.''
    Date: February 3, 2000.
    Time: 9:30 am to 10:30 am.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 
20852.
    Contact Person: Lyle Furr, Contract Review Specialist, Office of 
Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National 
Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC 
9547, Bethesda, MD 20892-9547, (301) 435-1439.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special 
Emphaisis Panel, SBIR--``Develop Prevention Research 
Dissemination.''
    Date: February 3, 2000.
    Time: 10:30 am to 3 pm.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 
20852.
    Contact Person: Lyle Furr, Contract Review Specialist, Office of 
Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National 
Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC 
9547, Bethesda, MD 20892-9547, (301) 435-1439.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.277, Drug 
Abuse Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, Scientist 
Development Awards, and Research Scientist Awards; 93.278, Drug 
Abuse National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 
93.279, Drug Abuse Research Programs, National Institutes of Health, 
HHS)

    Dated: January 31, 2000.
Anna Snouffer,
Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-2755 Filed 2-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 23.1  Consent of Independent Auditors





CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-91043, 333-60920, and 333-88070) pertaining to the 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002 Incentive Stock Option Plans As Amended, of our report dated February 20, 2004, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Stockgroup Information Systems Inc. in the Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31, 2003.





/s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Vancouver, Canada



March 11, 2004

Chartered Accountants
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED OCTOBER 5, 2023

NO. 03-22-00697-CR

Michael Tucker, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 390TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND KELLY

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE KELLY

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in 

the judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction. Because 

appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA

No. 07–0863 Filed January 23, 2009

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff,

vs. IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR JONES COUNTY,

Defendant.

Certiorari to the Iowa District Court for Jones County, David M. Remley, Judge.

Original certiorari action brought by State to challenge legality of district court’s decision in postconviction relief proceeding, holding application of Iowa Code section 903A.2 (2001) to inmate violated Ex Post

Facto Clause. WRIT ANNULLED.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Forrest Guddall, for plaintiff.

Philip B. Mears of Mears Law Office, Iowa City, for defendant.2

PER CURIAM. The State brought this original certiorari action challenging the legality of the district court’s decision granting postconviction relief to two inmates.The inmates, Terry Jones and Leonidas Psomas, were each serving a twentyfive-year sentence for 1996 convictions of second-degree sexual abuse. 1 In 2006, as a result of their refusal to participate in sex offender treatment, the department of corrections (DOC) determined Jones and Psomas were ineligible to receive further earned-time credits. See Iowa Code § 903A.2 (2005) (providing for reduction in sentence for good conduct and satisfactory participation in specified programs). Jones and Psomas claimed the application of this statute, as amended in 2001 and 2005, violated the Ex Post Facto Clause because the offenses for which they were incarcerated were committed prior to the amendments.

The inmates’ claims are identical to the claim raised in State v. Iowa District Court for Henry County , ___ N.W.2d ___ (Iowa 2009). In that case, we held the district court correctly determined the DOC’s application of amended section 903A.2 to inmates whose crimes predated the amendments violates the constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws. Our ruling in Henry County controls here. Therefore, we conclude the district court did not act illegally in ordering the State to restore the earned-time credits of

Jones and Psomas retroactive to the date on which the earned-time-credit accrual was suspended in each case. We annul the writ of certiorari.

WRIT ANNULLED. This opinion is not to be published.

1 The record does not reveal the dates of the inmates’ offenses that resulted in these sentences.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Form 10-K for the Year ended December 31, 2006, pursuant to Section 906

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Omega Protein Corporation, certifies, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, and
|- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  | the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Omega Protein Corporation.
|- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: March 12, 2007



/s/ ROBERT W. STOCKTONRobert W. StocktonExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


This certification is provided pursuant to Section 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 Omega Protein Corporation or the certifying officer for purposes of Section 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 Omega Protein Corporation and will be retained by Omega Protein Corporation
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 215 (Monday, November 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66567-66568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28402]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Engineering Education and Centers; 
Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Engineering Education and 
Centers (173).
    Date and Time: December 7-8, 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m.

[[Page 66568]]

    Place: National Science Foundation, Room 580, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Persons: Ms. Mary Poats, Program Manager, Engineering 
Education and Centers Division, National Science Foundation, Room 
585, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-
8384.
    Purpose of Meeting: to provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals submitted to the 
Research Experiences for Undergraduates Program as part of the 
selection process for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: October 31, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-28402 Filed 11-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 February 2, 2021

b0125

Order 

Clerk

February 2, 2021

161192 & (13)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 161192

COA: 351989

Kent CC: 18-009095-FC

KYLE RAYMOND MILLIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion to add document is GRANTED. The application 

for leave to appeal the February 13, 2020 order 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.
AOT Ref: A35N006-14 Rev 00 - Appendix 1

Airline:

Program:

MSN:

Activation ok?

PN MFG Date Lot Number Yes or No

ATA35 - chemical oxygen generators activation results

How many generators activated correctly:

How many generators failed:

Generators info
Exhibit 13.4


     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the
Annual Report on December 31, 2003 for the purpose of complying with Rule
13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
"Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States
Code.

Jose Salim Mattar Junior, the Chief Executive Officer, and Roberto Antonio
Mendes, the Principal Financial Officer of Prime Prestadora de Servicos S.A,
each certifies that, to the best of their respective 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 Prime
     Prestadora de Servicos S.A


Belo Horizonte, June 29, 2004


                               By:      /s/ Jose Salim Mattar Junior
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Name:  Jose Salim Mattar Junior
                                       Title: Chief Executive Officer-President
                                       Date:  June 29, 2004


                               By:      /s/ Roberto Antonio Mendes
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Name:  Roberto Antonio Mendes
                                       Title: Principal Financial Officer
                                       Date:  June 29, 2004
MATERIALS NOT INCLUDED IN

AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE (AD) DOCKET

FAA-2012-0746

Docket Number

2008-SW-35-AD

Directorate Identifier

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in DMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MDHI service bulletin, SB500N-029R3 for the Model 500N helicopters, and SB600N046R3 for the Model 600N helicopters, dated July 9, 2008.

MD Helicopters, Inc., SB900-107R1, dated March 14, 2008, for the Model MD900 

helicopters.

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Southwest Region

Rules Docket

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663

Fort Worth, Texas 76137

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays.
**EXHIBIT      32**

**CAREADVANTAGE,      INC**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

|                                                |   |   |                                                                                          |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                |   |   |                                                                                          |
| Dated:              May 15,              2007  |   |   | /s/              Dennis J.              Mouras                                                |
|                                                     |   |   | Dennis              J. Mouras,                                                                |
|                                                |   |   | Chief Executive Officer              and acting              Principal Financial Officer |

----
#### AGUILAR v. STATE.

No. 21620.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 28, 1941.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 8, 1941.

John B. Howard, of El Paso, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in Ward County for the offense of assault to murder and given two years in the penitentiary, from which he appeals.

We find no bills of exception and no brief in behalf of the appellant presenting his theory of the case. We have carefully examined the record and find the proceedings to be regular. The evidence amply justifies the jury’s verdict. It shows that Helen Cruz, the injured party, and appellant were in a beer and eating joint in or near the town of Grand Falls. They were Mexicans and their conversation with each other was not understood by the witness present. It is revealed, however, that they were sweethearts and while drinking together the appellant pulled a pistol and shot the girl several times. One wound was in the left temple, one in the neck, one in the shoulder and one in the chest. The physician who examined her testified that more than one of these wounds would ordinarily have produced death. The evidence sets forth no defense. The appellant himself did not take the stand and explain away the implication which arises from the circumstances that he intended to take her life.

There is no question of law presented for discussion, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant files a motion for rehearing in which he relies on Pleasant v. State, 137 Tex.Cr.R. 154, 128 S.W.2d 813, for a reversal.

The court submitted assault to murder with and without malice. The verdict is the same as that found in Pleasant’s case. Appellant apparently overlooks the fact that in the case mentioned the court sentenced accused for two years straight, whereas, in the present case he sentenced appellant for not less than one nor more than two years. If any error was commit*255ted, it seems to have been in appellant’s favor, of which he can not be heard to complain for the first time in a motion for rehearing.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.
#### Anthony HALL, Movant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Oct. 10, 1952.

Sanders & Hyden, Pikeville, for movant.

J. D. Buckman, Jr., Atty. Gen., opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from the Pike Circuit Court by Anthony Hall from a judgment convicting him of violating ICRS 242.310 and fixing his punishment at a fine of $100 and confinement in jail for 30 days.

A consideration of the record discloses no error prejudicial to movant’s substantial rights and the judgment is affirmed.
#### URBAN v. STATE.

No. 25495.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 21, 1951.

*709Hughes & Monroe, by Ted Monroe, and Curt Stiles, all of Dallas, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for tile State.

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for fraudulently receiving and concealing stolen property of the value of $50 or more; the punishment, 2 years in the penitentiary.

The indictment alleges that certain guns, including “1 double barrel Springfield 16 guage shot gun, 1 .22 Winchester automatic rifle, 1 .22 Hi-Standard automatic pistol, 1 9 M.M. ‘Chec’ automatic pistol, and 1 6.35 M.M. Belgian automatic pistol” owned by Marvin Fogleman and acquired from him by theft were fraudulently received by appellant from Jimmie Lee Broyles with knowledge that the guns had been so- acquired.

Mr. M. M. Fogleman testified that his store in Kaufman had been burglarized, and that 16 or 18 guns were stolen; that he recovered among other of these stolen guns “1 double barrel Springfield 16 guage shot gun (the same description as appears in the indictment), 1 .22 Winchester automatic (not described as ibeing a rifle), 1 High Standard automatic pistol (no caliber mentioned), 1 9 MM *Czech*automatic pistol, and 1 *635*MM Belgian automatic *pearl Irnndle*pistol.”

Officer J. H. Sawyer testified that he recovered from appellant seven guns. His description of five of these guns is the same as the foregoing description given by Mr. Fogleman.

Broyles testified that he was serving time in the penitentiary for burglary; that following the burglary, where he got the guns, he contacted appellant at his place of business in Dallas and sold him 6 or 7 of the guns.

It is not shown that the burglary referred to by Broyles or of which he was convicted, was the burglary of premises owned by Fogleman.

It may be observed that there is nothing in the description of the guns sold to appellant which might distinguish them from other guns of the same make, caliber and class, nor to identify them as belonging to Mr.' Fogleman.

No witness testified that the guns sold to appellant by Broyles belonged to Marvin Fogleman, nor were the guns found in -appellant’s possession identified as being the guns received from Broyles after having been stolen from Mr. Fogleman.

It is further noted that in the indictment the owner of the property is alleged to be Marvin Fogleman, while the witness who testified that he owned the burglarized premises and the guns is M. M. Fogleman.

It follows that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction.

The -judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6359

WILLIAM MORGANHERRING, IV, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES B. HUNT; MICHAEL F. EASLEY; JAMES B. FRENCH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-984-5-CT-BO) Submitted: June 18, 1998 Decided: July 8, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William MorganHerring, IV, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant, a North Carolina inmate, appeals the districtcourt’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(A) (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. MorganHerring v. Hunt , No. CA-97-984-5-CT-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 4, 1998). 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