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

 Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration,Labor (the Department).

# ACTION:

 Notice of technical correction.

                    On February 1, 2000, the Department published in the                     **Federal Register**                     (65 FR 4843) a notice of proposed exemption for Deutsche Bank which                     Start Printed Page 6229                    would allow the assets of certain employee benefit plans to be invested in synthetic guaranteed investment contracts (the Buy & Hold Synthetic GICs) that would be offered by Deutsche Bank. Due to a printing error, appearing on page 4846 of the proposed exemption in Representation 7, the formula for computing the Crediting Rate for each Buy & Hold Synthetic GIC, was stated as follows:                

The Department notes that the correct formula for calculating the Crediting Rate is

and it hereby amends the proposal.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Jan D. Broady of the Department at (202) 219-8881. (This is not a toll-free number.)

Signed at Washington, DC this 3rd day of February, 2000.

Ivan L. Strasfeld,

Director of Exemption Determinations, Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, Department of Labor.

[FR Doc. 00-2857 Filed 2-7-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-29-P
<PAGE>

                     32.2 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CFO

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund II,
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Kimberly A. Springsteen, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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 result of operations of the
Company.

/s/      Kimberly A. Springsteen
--------------------------------
Kimberly A. Springsteen
Principal Financial Officer
August 13, 2004
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

RENETTE BAPTISTE-FAUSTI,

Appellant,

v.

HOMEOWNERS CHOICE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE 

COMPANY, INC.,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-992

[April 4, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Joseph Marx, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502016CA013639XXXXMB.

Melissa A. Giasi of Giasi Law, P.A., Tampa, for appellant.

Celeste B. Marcks of Groelle & Salmon, P.A., West Palm Beach, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY, KLINGENSMITH and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
II 

Calendar No. 332 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3474 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 12, 2014 

Received 

MARCH 13, 2014 

Read the first time 

MARCH 24, 2014 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

AN ACT 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow employers to exempt employees with health coverage under 

TRICARE or the Veterans Administration from being 

taken into account for purposes of the employer mandate 

under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Hire More Heroes Act 

5 of 2014’’. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3474 PCS

1 SEC. 2. EMPLOYEES WITH HEALTH COVERAGE UNDER 

2 TRICARE OR THE VETERANS ADMINISTRA3 TION MAY BE EXEMPTED FROM EMPLOYER 

4 MANDATE UNDER PATIENT PROTECTION AND 

5 AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 4980H(c)(2) of the Inter7 nal Revenue Code is amended by adding at the end the 

8 following: 

9 ‘‘(F) EXEMPTION FOR HEALTH COVERAGE

10 UNDER TRICARE OR THE VETERANS ADMINIS11 TRATION.—Solely for purposes of determining 

12 whether an employer is an applicable large em13 ployer under this paragraph for any month, an 

14 employer may elect not to take into account for 

15 a month as an employee any individual who, for 

16 such month, has medical coverage under— 

17 ‘‘(i) chapter 55 of title 10, United 

18 States Code, including coverage under the 

19 TRICARE program, or 

20 ‘‘(ii) under a health care program 

21 under chapter 17 or 18 of title 38, United 

22 States Code, as determined by the Sec23 retary of Veterans Affairs, in coordination 

24 with the Secretary of Health and Human 

25 Services and the Secretary.’’. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 3474 PCS

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

2 subsection (a) shall apply to months beginning after De3 cember 31, 2013. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 11, 

2014. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 332 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3474 

AN ACT 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 

tient Protection and Affordable Care Act. purposes of the employer mandate under the Paministration from being taken into account for coverage under TRICARE or the Veterans Adallow employers to exempt employees with health 

MARCH 24, 2014 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# I *

de p

wes t Virgini a departmen t o f environmenta l protectio n Executiv e Offic e Ear l Ra y Tomblin , Governo r 60 1 57 t

hS T S E Rand y C
. Huffman , Cabine t Secretar y Charleston , W V 2430 4 www.dep.wv.go v Marc h8 , 201 2 Mr
. Shaw n M
. Garvi n (3RAOO ) Regiona l Administrato r US EPA Regio n 3 165 0 Arc hStree

t Philadelphia , P A 19103-202 9 Re: Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan forthe West Virginia Portion of

the Wheeling, WV-OH1997PM 2 . 5NonattainmentArea Dear Administrato r

Garvin : Th e State o f

Wes t Virgini ai s requestin g that EP A redesignat e th e Wes t Virgini aportio n o f

th e Wheeling , WV-O H 199 7 PMi. s Nonattainmen t Are at o attainmen t

pursuan t t o th e provision s o f th e Clean Ai r

Act , Sectio n 107
. Th e State i s als o askin g that EP A concurrentl y approve , a s a revisio n to th e State Implementatio n Plan (SIP) , th e relate dCAA , Sectio n 17 5 A maintenanc e pla n whic hdemonstrate s tha t th e are awil l continu e t o mee t th e PM2. 5 ai r

qualit y standard s fo r

a t leas t te n mor e years . Th e reques t

i s detaile di n th e enclose dhardcopy : Redesignation Request an d Maintenance Plan fo r th e West Virginia Portion o

f th e Wheeling, WV-OH

1997 PM2.5Nonattainment

Area an dth e supportin g documentatio n i s provide di n electroni c format , o n th e enclose dcompac t discs
. W e certif y that th e electroni c copie s includ e exac t duplicate s o f

th e har dcopy . Th e electroni c copie s als o furnis hadditiona l informatio n whic hha s no t bee n presente di n hardcop y form
. W e certif y tha t th e publi c hearin g require db y 4 0 CF R§51.102(a ) wa s hel di n accordanc e withth e applicabl e state law s an dth e requirement s o f 4 0 CF R§51.102(d)
. EP A an dth e state o f Ohi o were notifie dat

th e beginnin g o f

th e publi c commen t

period
. Pleas e contac t

Joh n Benedict , Director , Divisio n o f

Ai r Qualit y at

(304 ) 926-0462 , i f

yo u hav e an y question s o r nee dadditiona l information
. Sincerely ,
Rand y C
. FMffma n Cabine t Secretar y Enclosure s cc : Dian aEshe r

(3APOO ) Joh n Benedic t Promotin g a health yenvironment

.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KEELY JOHNSON,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

COUNTY OF SONOMA; CATHERINE

SPEAKS, DEPUTY; GREGORY

HALS, DEPUTY,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 14-15276

D.C. No. 3:11-cv-05811-CRB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Charles R. Breyer, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 7, 2016** 

San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges, and WHALEY,

***

Senior District Judge.

 

FILED

FEB 19 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

 *** The Honorable Robert H. Whaley, Senior District Judge for the U.S.

District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, sitting by designation.
page 2

The district court appropriately exercised its discretion in instructing the jury

regarding Ms. Johnson’s excessive force claim. “Jury instructions must be

formulated so that they fairly and adequately cover the issues presented, correctly

state the law, and are not misleading.” Brewer v. City of Napa, 210 F.3d 1093,

1097 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting Chuman v. Wright, 76 F.3d 292, 294 (9th Cir.

1996)). The instructions given by Judge Breyer easily meet this standard, as they

clearly direct the jury to conduct the essential inquiry in excessive force cases:

whether, given all of the circumstances known to the officer, the use of force was

“objectively reasonable.” See Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396 (1989).

The absence of an instruction regarding the availability of alternatives to

subdue Ms. Johnson does not render the instructions inadequate. A district court’s

refusal to include detailed instructions addressing specific factors to be considered

is not error where the instructions adequately direct the jury to consider the totality

of the circumstances in determining whether the application of force was

objectively reasonable. See Brewer, 210 F.3d at 1097; see also Fikes v. Cleghorn,

47 F.3d 1011, 1014 (9th Cir. 1995) (“This instruction complies with Graham by

focusing on the totality of the circumstances.” (emphasis in original)). This is

especially true in light of Ms. Johnson’s failure to offer any direct evidence

regarding the availability of alternative methods of control.
page 3

Despite Ms. Johnson’s contention that she was entitled to the instruction

because the availability of alternatives was her theory of the case, it is not error to

decline to give a “theory-of-the-case instruction” where the remaining instructions

cover the proponent’s theory. Brewer, 210 F.3d at 1097 (quoting United States v.

Lawrence, 189 F.3d 838, 843 (9th Cir. 1999)). The instructions gave Ms. Johnson

ample room to argue her theory of the case to the jury, and otherwise fairly and

adequately covered the issues presented, correctly stated the law, and were not

misleading.

AFFIRMED.
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 Annual Report of Nexicon,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on  the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  each  of the
undersigned,  in the  capacities  and  on  the  dates  indicated  below,  hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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  operation of the
Company.

Date:  July 14, 2005                            By:  /s/ Daniel Urrea
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Daniel Urrea,
                                                  Chief Financial Officer


         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other  document  authentications,   acknowledging,  or  otherwise  adopting  the
signature  that  appears in typed form  within  the  electronic  version of this
written  statement  required by Section 906, has been provided to Nexicon,  Inc.
and will be  retained by Nexicon,  Inc.  and  furnished  to the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                 EXHIBIT 32.2-1
#### DAVILA v. STATE.

No. 24361.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 27, 1949.

No appearance for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Upon an indictment charging the offense of assault with intent to murder, the appellant was convicted of an aggravated *804assault. His punishment was assessed at confinement in the county jail for three months and a fine of $300.

The indictment and all matters of procedure appear regular. The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception, in the absence' of which no question is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE HOLMES GROUP, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN IT ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           6,647
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  152,321
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,057
<INVENTORY>                                    112,660
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               285,297
<PP&E>                                         133,240
<DEPRECIATION>                                  78,892
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 456,496
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           73,613
<BONDS>                                        338,710
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            20
<OTHER-SE>                                      37,780
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   456,496
<SALES>                                        506,833
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               506,833
<CGS>                                          363,654
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  363,654
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,448<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,297
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,472
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    823
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (87)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,812
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,812
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Product development expenses
<F2>The Company's shares are not publicly traded.
</FN>


</TABLE>
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: Loren Grosskopf, Chairman . Joseph E.. Tilden, Vice Chairman Bucky Hall, Commissioner PARK COTJ:\TY, WYOMING 0RGA.l>lZED 1911 Lee Livingston, Commissio1Jer Tim A. French, Commissioner

.ORIGINAL PARK CouNTY CouRTHOUSE · · ·Com;W<roMING Commissioners' Office March 5, 2013 Michael F. Martin United States Department ofTransportation 400 SeventhStreet, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 COMPLETED 1912

RE: Letter of Supportfor 'Essential Air Service Dear Mr. Martin: ,······ ,,) !,,.,}..•.! The Park County, Wyoming County Commissioners support the application fromSkyWestAirlines to provide Essential Air Service to the Yellowstone Regional I.,'

.Airportin Cody, Wyoming. SkyWest Airlines has provided air service to Park County

residents since 1994 and provides a key economic componentto our community. The citizens ofPark County rely on air service for both commercial and leisure travel. The Park County area is also a major tourist destination due to our proximity to Yellowstone National Park. Itis essential thatconsistent, reliable air service be maintained to our community.

1002 Sheridan Avenue Sincerely, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PARK COUNTY, WYOMING .ABSENT

Tim A. French, Commissioner Cody, Wyoming 82414 (307) 527-8510 Fax: 527-S515
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed October 27, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D20-1588

Lower Tribunal No. 17-29188

________________

Jose Guzman,

Appellant,

vs.

Fabrizio Pucci and Franca Felli,

Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Peter R. 

Lopez, Judge.

Jose Guzman, in proper person.

Krinzman Huss Lubetsky Feldman & Hotte, and Mason A. Pertnoy, 

for appellees.

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY and GORDO, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Jones, Appellee, *v.*Bontempo et al., State Board of Barber Examiners, Appellants.

(No. 28387

Decided February 19, 1941.)

*635
      *Mr. George Weller,*for appellee.

*Mr. Thomas J. Herbert,*attorney general, *Mr. Fred W. Edmonston*and *Mr. Richard A. Morris,*for appellants.

By the Court.

Defendants raise no question as to jurisdiction or venue, and it would seem plain from a perusal of Section 1081-18, General Code, that an action against the state Board of Barber Examiners to set aside, vacate or modify its decision need not necessarily be brought in the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin county. Section 1081-18, General Code, as a later specific enactment, creates an exception to Section 11271, General Code.

The trade of barbering, operating as it does directly on the person of the customer, affects the health, com*636fort and safety of the public and may be regulated within reasonable limits by the legislative branch of the government under that power known as the police power, “conceded to reside in the people’s representatives, which is rightfully exercised by the regulation of the use of private property, or so restraining personal action, as to secure, or tend to the comfort, health, or protection of the community.” *State*v. *Gardner,*58 Ohio St., 599, 606, 51 N. E., 136, 65 Am. St. Rep., 785, 41 L. R. A., 689. See, also, 8 Ohio Jurisprudence, 334, Section 229; 11 American Jurisprudence, 972, Section 247.

Therefore, those engaged in the occupation of barbering or those desiring to pursue that business may be examined as to their competency and fitness and are subject to supervision and control in the matters of cleanliness, sanitation, conduct, habits, infectious and contagious diseases, and things of that kind.

The General Assembly of Ohio has spoken on the subject by enacting Section 1081-1 *et seq.,*General Code, and has created the state Board of Barber Examiners to execute and administer such laws.

However, legislation of this character must bear some discernible relationship to the public health or welfare, and the General Assembly cannot under the guise of its police power impose unreasonable, captious or arbitrary rules, having no recognizable connection therewith.

How the mere advertising of the price of haircuts as done by the plaintiff could in any wise affect public health or welfare is difficult to understand.

If this legislation, absolutely prohibiting the advertising of prices of barber services, were to be upheld, it would likewise be necessary to uphold legislation prohibiting the vendors of groceries, meats or other commodities from advertising prices thereof in any manner, the unreasonableness of which is at once apparent.

This court is unanimously of the opinion that the *637particular legislation complained of in this case unduly interferes with the constitutional prerogatives of plaintiff as to freedom of action, speech and property rights. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is accordingly affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Turner, Williams, Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman and Bettman, JJ., concur.
#### CRAIG v. *STATE.*

No. 22232.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 2, 1942.

On Motion to Reinstate Appeal Jan. 6, 1943.

Jones <& Jones, of Mineóla, for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Conviction is for selling intoxicating liquor in a dry area, punishment assessed being a fine of $150.

No judgment appears in the transcript. Without a judgment of conviction no appeal will lie. See authorities cited in Note 5, Art. 813, Vernon’s Tex.C.C.P., Vol. 3.

The appeal is dismissed.

On Motion to Reinstate Appeal

KRUEGER, Judge.

At a former day of this term of court wp dismissed the appeal by reason of a deficient record. The record having been perfected by the filing of a supplemental tran*525script, the appeal is now reinstated and the case will be disposed of on its merits.

The question presented in this appeal is exactly the same as that discussed in the companion case of Craig v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 167 S.W.2d 523, this day decided. For the reason stated in that case, the judgment of the trial court in the present instance is reversed and the cause remanded.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
**UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD ANN ARBOR, MI 48105 - 2498 OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION July 18 , 2011 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Meeting with Isuzu on May 5, 2011 FROM: Don Kopinski TO: Docket EPA - HQ - OAR- 2010 - 0162 This memorandum documents a meeting held on May 5 , 2011 b etween Isuzu and EPA staff. The following people attended : Isuzu : Jeff Marsee, Takahiro Koseki EPA: By ron Bunker, Chris Nevers, Cle Jackson , and Don Kopinski The discussion focused on Nissan’s plans for HD incomplete vehicles and how the EPA/NHTSA HD GHG and fuel consumption program will affect them , and especially on their lack of a sister vehicle for some of these vehi cles, under the proposed definitions and regulatory structure .