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

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1496 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1496

                     One Hundred Fifteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 3585 South Vermont Avenue in Los Angeles, California, as the ``Marvin 
                           Gaye Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. MARVIN GAYE POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 3585 South Vermont Avenue in Los Angeles, California, shall 
be known and designated as the ``Marvin Gaye Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Marvin 
Gaye Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
Exhibit 32.2

 

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), the undersigned officer of Foothills Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) does hereby certify with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2006 (the “Report”) 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:  April 30, 2007 |   | By:         W. Kirk Bosché                                

Name:    W. Kirk BoschéTitle:     Chief Financial Officer |
|-----------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
AIRCRAFT

o Flight Time

Up to 25 Minutes

o Dimension

16.5x16.5x9.5in (420x420x240mm)

o Diagonal Length Without Rotor Blades 

22.2in (565mm)

o Propeller/Main Rotor Diameter

13.0in (330mm)

o Weight Without Battery and Payload

40.0oz (1130g)

o Battery

5400mAh 3S 11.1V LiPo (included) 

o Charger

3S 11.1V LiPo DC Balancing Smart Charger with AC Adapter (included)

o Transmitter

10-channel 2.4GHz with 5.8GHz video downlink (included) 

o 3 Flight Modes

Smart, Angle and Home Modes 

o Maximum Flying Height

Default 122m (400ft) Above Ground Level (Adjustable via the Q500 GUI)

o Maximum Rotation Rate

65°/s 

o Maximum Roll Angle

35° 

o Radio Control Frequency Band

2.4GHz 

o Operating Temperature Range

-5°C to 80°C

GIMBAL

o Dimension

4.5x1.4x2.9in (115x135x74mm)

o Weight

6.5oz (185g) 

o Focusing System

Aerial Optimized Fixed Focus

o Field of View

130°

o Video Transmission Range
FCC Compliance: Up to 600m (1968.5 ft) 

CE Compliance: Up to 300m (984.252 ft) with ST10 

o Video Resolution

FULL HD 1080p - Adjustable 60, 50 or 48 FPS

o Photo Resolution

12 Megapixels 

o Storage (memory)

microSD Class 10 ~ 4 to 128GB

o Control Angle Accuracy

±0.02°

o White Balance

Automatic Smart White Balance Feature

o Transmission Band

5.8GHz

o Input/Operating Voltage

7.0V to 14.0V DC

o Working Temperature

0°C-50°C

o Storage Temperature

-20°C-60°C

o Angular Vibration Range

±0.02° 

o Control Range

Pitch:between -90° and 0° Yaw:between 0° and 360°

PERSONAL GROUND STATION

o Operating System

AndroidTM

o Number of Channels

10

o Control Transmission Distance/Range (Optimum Conditions)

FCC Compliance: Up to 800m (2624.67 ft) CE Compliance: Up to 400m (1312.34 ft) Warning: You Must Follow 

Local Laws and Maintain Visual Line of Sight of Aircraft at All Times.

o Robust Radio Control Modulation

Yuneec Protocol

o Video link Frequency Band

5.8GHz

o Video Transmission Distance/Range (Optimum Conditions)

FCC Compliance: Up to 600m (1968.5 ft) CE Compliance: Up to 300m (984.252 ft) Warning: You Must Follow Local 

Laws and Maintain Visual Line of Sight of Aircraft at All Times.
o Flight Systems Telemetry Data On Screen Display (OSD)

Yes

o LED Backlit LCD Screen

Capacitive Multi-Touch 4.5”

o Tactile (Vibrating) and Audible Feedback

Yes

o Built-In LiPo Battery Voltage / Capacity

3.6V/5200mAh 18.72Wh 

o Charger

Auto-Charge Mode via Micro-B USB Cable with AC to 5V DC USB Power Supply (Included)
#### McKey, Respondent, vs. Egeland and another, Appellants.

*September 15*

October *13, 1936.*

*491For the appellants there were briefs by *Robert R. Freeman,*attorney, and *Ronold A. Drechsler*of counsel, both of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Mr. Freeman.*

For the respondent the cause was submitted on the brief of *Strehlow & Cranston*of Green Bay.

Fowler, J.

The plaintiff is a nonresident of the state, and the defendants procured an *ex parte*order directing the plaintiff to file security for costs within twenty days. The plaintiff did not file the bond within the time prescribed by the order. The defendants thereupon procured an *ex parte*judgment dismissing the action for failure to comply with the order. The court thereafter on motion of the plaintiff vacated the order of dismissal, permitted the filing of the security and reinstated the action for further proceedings. From the latter order the defendants appeal.

The order is not appealable. No orders are appealable except as provided by sec. 274.33, Stats., sub. (1) of which 'permits appeal from an order affecting a substantial right that in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment from which an appeal may be taken. The order involved falls under said sub. (1). It affects a substantial right, but it does not determine the action and prevent a judgment from which an appeal may be taken. There is no other section of the statute under which the order can fall. It does not fall under sub. (2) because it is not a “final order.” Obviously it cannot fall under subs. (3) and (4). The situation is not materially different from that involved in *Hanson v. Custer,*203 Wis. 55, 233 N. W. 642, wherein an order was held not appealable that vacated a former order that for want of bringing the case to trial within five years dismissed all proceedings subsequent to entry of a judgment on cognovit which had been vacated and defense permitted. The order there vacated terminated the action as effectively as did the judgment of dismissal here involved.

*492The appellants cite *Felton v. Hopkins,*89 Wis. 143, 61 N. W. 77, in support of the appealability of the order, wherein an order refusing dismissal of a case for failure to comply with an order requiring security for costs was held erroneous and reversed. The question of the appealability of that order was not raised and was not considered by the court, apparently because the statute then governing appeals from orders was not in mind. Subs. (1) and (2) of the statute, sec. 3069, Stats. 1889, were then the same as now, and the order appealed from did not fall under either of these provisions or any other provision of the statute. This court has. no jurisdiction to pass upon the merits of an order that is not appealable. *Gilbert v. Hoard,*201 Wis. 572, 230 N. W. 720. The appeal must be dismissed, and it is so ordered.

*By the Court.*— The appeal is dismissed.
# L_2015134EN.01003201.xml

| 30.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 134/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 134/32

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1230/2014 of 17 November 2014 concerning the authorisation of copper bilysinate as a feed additive for all animal species

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 331 of 18 November 2014
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 331 of 18 November 2014

On page 20, Annex, fourth line of the fourth column ‘Composition, chemical formula, description, analytical method’:

for:

‘... lysine ...’,

read:

‘... lysine-HCl ...’.

---
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 20 (Friday, January 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 5115]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01767]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices: Notice of Charter 
Amendment

    This gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 
92-463) of October 6, 1972, that the Advisory Committee on Immunization 
Practices, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department 
of Health and Human Services (HHS), has amended their charter to 
reflect the change in the filing date. The amended filing date is 
January 13, 2015.
    For information, contact Dr. Larry Pickering, Designated Federal 
Officer, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, HHS, CDC, 1600 
Clifton Road NE., Mailstop E05, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone (404) 
639-8562 or fax (404) 639-8626.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to 
announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, 
for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency 
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Elaine L. Baker,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2015-01767 Filed 1-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Keith Harley, Appellant.

[632 NYS2d 39]

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The record shows that defendant voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently pleaded guilty to burglary in the second degree and assault in the second degree and waived his right to appeal. Under the circumstances, defendant waived his right to challenge the sufficiency of County Court’s inquiry concerning the credentials of defendant’s sign interpreter. In any event, the interpreter identified herself as a "certified sign interpreter”, was sworn to act as a sign interpreter during every court appearance in this case and served in that capacity without objection. We nevertheless caution that, under different circumstances, a more detailed inquiry whether an interpreter satisfied the credential requirements of Judiciary Law § 390 might be required. (Appeal from Judgment of Cayuga County Court, Corning, J. — Burglary, 2nd Degree.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Wesley, Balio and Boehm, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Velocity Express Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Daniel R. DeFazio, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Daniel R. DeFazioDaniel R. DeFazio Chief Financial Officer February 17, 2006
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

April 29, 2020 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. GARY WAYNE BUNCH

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Campbell County

No. 17356 E. Shayne Sexton, Judge

___________________________________

No. E2019-00300-CCA-R3-CD

___________________________________

TIMOTHY L. EASTER, J, concurring.

I concur fully with the conclusion reached by the majority that there was evidence 

to support the trial court’s decision to revoke Defendant’s probation and to order Defendant 

to serve the balance of his original sentence in incarceration. I write separately to affirm

my belief expressed in my concurring opinion in State v. Craig Dagnan, No. M2020-

00152-CCA-R3-CD, 2021WL 289010, at *3 (Tenn. Crim. App. Jan. 28, 2021), perm. app. 

filed, that once a determination is made that a defendant has violated the conditions of his 

or her probation, neither an additional hearing nor any additional findings are statutorily 

mandated of a trial court to determine the manner in which the original sentence should be 

served. Thus, there is no opportunity for an abuse of discretion when a “second exercise 

of discretion” is not required by either sections 40-35-310 or 40-35-311 of Tennessee Code 

Annotated.

As stated in Craig Dagnan, I do not mean to suggest that a trial court has unfettered 

discretion to do as he or she pleases after a probation violation is found. Furthermore, I 

am aware that the practice of having an additional hearing to assist the trial court in 

reaching the ends of justice is commonplace in Tennessee trial courts. I do not believe 

such inquisition is wrong or ill-advised. Every circumstance is different and every 

defendant’s achievements and failures are noteworthy. I simply just do not see that the 

statutes mandate such an additional hearing. 

____________________________________

TIMOTHY L. EASTER, JUDGE

03/03/2021
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Loss of an Iridium-192 Source and Therapy Misadministration at Indiana Regional Cancer Center Indiana, Pennsylvania, on November 16, 1992 (NUREG-1480)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1480 (PDF - 83.48 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**February 1993**Date Published:**February 1993

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

On December 1, 1992, the Indiana Regional Cancer Center reported to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Region I that they believed a 1.37 E+ 11 becquerel (3. 7-curie) iridium-192 source from their Omnitron 2000 high dose rate remote brachytherapy afterloader had been found at a biohazard waste transfer station in Carnegie, Pennsylvania. After notifying the NRC, this cancer center, one of several operated by the licensee, Oncology Services Corporation, retrieved the source, and Region I dispatched an inspector and a supervisor to investigate the event. The source was first detected when it triggered radiation alarms at a waste incinerator facility in Warren, Ohio. The licensee informed the NRC that the source wire had apparently broken during treatment of a patient on November 16, 1992, leaving the source in the patient. On the basis of the seriousness of the incident, the NRC elevated its response to an Incident Investigation. The Incident Investigation Team initiated its investigation on December 3, 1992. The investigation team concluded that the patient received a serious misadministration and died on November 21 , 1992, and that over90 individuals were exposed to radiation from November 16 to December 1, 1992. In apress release dated January 26, 1993, the Indiana County Coroner stated that the cause of death listed in the official autopsy report was "Acute Radiational Exposure and Consequences Thereof." An almost identical source wire failure occurred with an afterloader in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on December 7, 1992, but with minimal radiological consequences. This incident was included in the investigation. This report discusses the Omnitron 2000 high dose rate afterloader source-wire failure, the reasons why the failure was not detected by Indiana Regional Cancer Center, the potential consequences to the patient, the estimated radiological doses to workers and the public, and regulatory aspects associated with this incident.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
No. 90-6398.

#### Lopez *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<Page>





                                                                    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/A of Globix Corporation
(the "Company") for the period ending March 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter
K. Stevenson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

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

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of
March 31, 2002 (the last date of the period covered by the Report).



                                             /s/ Peter K. Stevenson
                                             Peter K. Stevenson
                                             Chief Executive Officer
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Recommendations for Shielding Evaluations for Transport & Storage Packages (NUREG/CR-6802)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6802 (PDF - 4.69 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** November 2002**Date Published:** May 2003

**Prepared by:** B.L. Broadhead

Oak Ridge National Laboratory Managed by UT-Battelle, LLC Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6370

C. J. Withee, NRC Project Manager

NRC Job Code B0009

**Prepared for**: Spent Fuel Project Office Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report provides recommendations on the approach to use in the preparation of radiation shielding evaluations for transportation and storage of packages containing radioactive material. The various methods, models, and processes relating to the source term, shielding and measurement portions of the submittals are described. The recommendations in this document are designed to address the regulatory requirements in 10 CFR Parts 71 and 72 and supplement the guidance in the standard review plans issued for transportation and dry cask storage.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
No: 19-004 January 15, 2019

CONTACT: Ivonne Couret, 301-415-8200

NRC Opens Online Registration for 2019 Regulatory Information Conference

Online registration is now open for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s 31st annual 

Regulatory Information Conference, to be held March 12-14 in North Bethesda, Md. 

The NRC offices of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and Nuclear Regulatory Research jointly host

the annual RIC, which is open to the public. No-fee registration is required to attend. The conference 

agenda and online registration links are available on the NRC website. The deadline for online 

registration is Feb. 26. The conference usually draws approximately 3,000 attendees, including industry 

executives, representatives from state governments, non-governmental organizations, individual 

community members, and representatives from foreign countries. The conference is an opportunity for 

attendees to discuss issues related to the safety and security of commercial nuclear facilities and current 

regulatory activities. 

The program will open with remarks from NRC Chairman Kristine L. Svinicki and Executive 

Director for Operations Margaret M. Doane, who will also take questions. Additional program 

highlights will include remarks from NRC Commissioners Jeff Baran, Stephen G. Burns, Annie Caputo 

and David A. Wright. Technical sessions will focus on significant domestic and international issues, 

such as cybersecurity, risk-informed analysis, advanced and small modular reactors, spent fuel research 

activities, recent reactor material issues and the reactor oversight process.

Early registration is encouraged; however, onsite registration will also be available during the 

conference. The conference will be held at the Bethesda North Marriott, 5701 Marinelli Road, in North 

Bethesda. For more information regarding registration hours, badge protocol, security and new parking 

garage guidance, visit the NRC website.