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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [License No. 09/09-0467]

Pursuant to the authority granted to the United States Small Business Administration under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended, under Section 309 of the Act and Section 107.1900 of the Small Business Administration Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.1900) to function as a small business investment company under the Small Business Investment Company License No. 09/09-0467 issued to The Central Valley Fund II (SBIC), L.P., said license is hereby declared null and void.

United States Small Business Administration.

Bailey DeVries,

Associate Administrator, Office of Investment and Innovation.

[FR Doc. 2022-02833 Filed 2-9-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       4,028,271
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               22,657,113
<ALLOWANCES>                                   836,945
<INVENTORY>                                  3,889,603
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            40,586,920
<PP&E>                                       9,552,994
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,910,294
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              50,473,354
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       30,715,495
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,515
<OTHER-SE>                                  18,070,072
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                50,473,354
<SALES>                                    113,384,220
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           113,384,220
<CGS>                                       91,706,290
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              110,362,979
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,519,378
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             669,373
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,501,863
<INCOME-TAX>                                   450,559
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,051,304
<DISCONTINUED>                               2,373,502
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,424,806
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32


</TABLE>
C & J GLOBAL INVESTMENTS, INC., a Florida Corporation, Petitioner, v. JVS CONTRACTING, INC., a Florida Corporation; Chicago Title Insurance Agency, a Nebraska Corporation; Capgain Properties, Inc., formerly known as Big Mojo Capital, Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of the Province of Alberta, Canada; Capgain Holdings, Inc., formerly known as Capgain Properties, Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of the Province of Alberta, Canada; Michael Loprieno and Brian Knight, Respondents.

Case No. 2D17-2749

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
particles out of the furnace and transports them pneumatically to a cyclone classifier system to be 

collected. The air-suspended perlite particles are also cooled as they are transported to the 

collection equipment. The cyclone classifier system collects the expanded perlite, removes the 

excessive fines, and discharges gases to a baghouse or wet scrubber for air pollution control. The 

grades of expanded perlite produced can also be adjusted by changing the heating cycle, altering 

the cutoff points for size collection, and blending various crude ore sizes. All processed products 

are graded for specific uses and are usually stored before being shipped. Most production rates 

are less than 2 tons/hr, and expansion furnace temperatures range fkom 1600 to 1800 F. Natural 

gas is typically used for fuel, although No. 2 fuel oil and propane are occasionally used. 

2.0 GRIC Source Profile 

Four sources currently located and operating on GRIC land comprise the nonmetallic minerals 

mining and processing source category. Those sources are: 

United Metro #4 1 

United Metro #48 

= Rock Solid 

Thermo-Rock Inc. 

United Metro # 41 

This facility includes a sand and gravel mining operation, two concrete batch plants, and a hot 

mix asphalt plant. The facility is subject to NSPS Subpart 000 (Nonmetallic Mineral 

Processing) and NSPS Subpart I (Hot Mix Asphalt). Appendix A of this document includes site 

visit notes providing Met details on this facility as well as a generalized process flow diagram. 

United Metro #48 

This facility is another sand and gravel mining and processing operation with a concrete batch 

plant. United Metro No. 48 does not operate a hot mix asphalt plant. The facility is subject to 

NSPS Subpart 000 (Nonmetallic Mineral Processing). 

Rock Solid 

Rock Solid is a concrete batch plant without associated mineral mining and processing stages. 

Aggregate and other raw materials are delivered to the site and loaded to hoppers prior to 

weighing, mixing, and truck loading. Concrete is loaded to trucks in dry form and water is added 

directly to the concrete trucks on site prior to departure. Rock Solid plans to move and expand its 

operations on GRIC land. 

Thenno-Rock Inc. 

Thermo-Rock, Inc. is a vermiculate and perlite processing facility. Operations include 

vermiculite and perlite expansion furnaces, potting soil manufacture, and fite retardant 

NMMProc TSD 6-14-02 Created on 611 812002 9:39:00 AM
J.W., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0185

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 19, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Keith LINES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3349

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 15, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
Charles L. MARTIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2921

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed December 26, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.1





CERTIFICATION



I, John R. Hagan, certify
that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of SED International Holdings,
Inc.;
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit
to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Date: November 12, 2013



/s/ John R. Hagan

John R. Hagan

Interim Chief Executive
Officer

(Principal Executive
Officer)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Thomas Lee BURNS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-4773

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 27, 2017

Decided: July 31, 2017

Ross Hall Richardson, Joshua B. Carpenter, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Lee Burns appeals his conviction and the 34-month sentence imposed after he pled guilty without a plea agreement to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g), 924(a)(2) (2012). Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), noting that Burns wished to challenge the enhancement to his base offense level, but conceding that Burns’ release from prison renders moot any challenge to the imprisonment component of the criminal judgment. The Government has declined to file a response brief and Burns has not filed a pro se supplemental brief, despite receiving notice of his right to do so. Finding no reversible error, we affirm in part and dismiss in part.

We agree with counsel that we lack jurisdiction to review the imprisonment component of Burns’ sentence, as his release from prison renders moot any challenge to the imposed term of imprisonment. As a result of Burns’ release, “there is no wrong to remedy[,]” and this court “cannot grant any effectual relief whatever in favor of the appellant” as to the imprisonment component of his sentence.*
      *United States v. Hardy,*545 F.3d 280, 285 (4th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks omitted).

In accordance with our obligations under *Anders,*we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm in part and dismiss in part. This court requires that counsel inform Burns, *128in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Burns requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Burns. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART*

Although Burns remains on supervised release, we discern no error in the supervised release portion of the district court’s judgment.
Sharon LEE a/k/a Sharon Byrd, DOC #577342, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4014

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 14, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1509 

To repeal portions of a regulation issued by the State Superintendent of 

Education of the District of Columbia that require child care workers 

to have a degree, a certificate, or a minimum number of credit hours 

from an institution of higher education. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 2, 2021 

Ms. MACE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Oversight and Reform 

A BILL 

To repeal portions of a regulation issued by the State Superintendent of Education of the District of Columbia that 

require child care workers to have a degree, a certificate, 

or a minimum number of credit hours from an institution 

of higher education. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF DC REGULATIONS REGARDING 

4 HIGHER EDUCATION QUALIFICATIONS OF 

5 CHILD CARE WORKERS. 

6 Any provision of Chapter 1 of Subtitle A of Title 5 

7 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations, as 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1509 IH

1 added by the final rulemaking of the State Superintendent 

2 of Education of the District of Columbia issued on Decem3 ber 7, 2016, that requires a staff member of a child devel4 opment facility to have a degree, a certificate, or a min5 imum number of credit hours from an institution of higher 

6 education, including sections 164.1, 165.1, 166.1(a), 

7 170.2(a), 173.3, 174.2(a), and 174.2(b), shall have no 

8 force or effect. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                            9742
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     5965
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                            3127
<DEPRECIATION>                                    2430
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  104476
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2613
<OTHER-SE>                                       26853
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    104476
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  4230
<CGS>                                             4531
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (301)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (122)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (179)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (179)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2
                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

In connection with the Annual Report of American Telstar, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter Porath, Vice
President, Secretary, Treasurer and 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 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; And
     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.

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.


Date: October 23, 2009

By:  /s/ Peter Porath
     -------------------------------------
     Peter Porath - Vice-President,
     Secretary, Treasurer & Chief
     Financial Officer
D.W. v. STATE

2160227

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
EXHIBIT A

Case: 1:18-cv-00357-TSB-KNM-MHW Doc #: 79-1 Filed: 09/28/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 828
Case: 1:18-cv-00357-TSB-KNM-MHW Doc #: 79-1 Filed: 09/28/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID
Jonathan Edward HOGAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-3703

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Thomas E. Mara, ChiefExecutive Officer of The FINOVA Group Inc., certify that: 

 

1.               I have reviewed this quarterly report onForm 10-Q of The FINOVA Group Inc.;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officerand I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 (e) and 15d-15 (e))for the registrant and we have:

 

a)              Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;

 

b)             Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

c)              Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officerand I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a)              All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)             Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
|                     |                                    |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| Date:  November 10, 2003 | /s/  Thomas E. Mara                     |
|                     | Thomas E. Mara  Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
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 Salon Media Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Norman Blashka, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and





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





June 29, 2011


/s/ Norman BlashkaNorman Blashka
Chief Financial Officer
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-15-00521- CV
RogerF ay, Appellan t

v. Texas A&MUniversity, G eochem ical and E nvironme ntal Resear ch Gr oup; The College of Geosc iences and Maritim e Studies; Dr. Ray Bowen; Dr. Rober t Duce ; Dr. Nor m an Guinasso; Dr. RogerSassen; and Dr. David Schink , Appellees

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 200 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 97- 0888 8, H ONO RAB LE AMY CLARK MEACH UM, J UDGE P RESIDING

O R D E R P ER CURIAM

On No v ember 25, 2015, this Court dismiss ed thi s appea l for want of prosecution. 1 Subsequently , counsel for appellant, claiming that computer problems had left him u n aw ar e of the elec tronically -transmitted notices that had prec eded our dismiss al, has moved that we withdraw our opinion and reinstate the appea l. Appellee s have opposed the motion. We will g rant the motion, withdraw our opinion and judgme nt dated November 25, 2015, and reinstate the appea l. We order —and our Clerk will also follow up with a phone call, lest there rema in any further doubts as to counsel’ s rec eipt of the notice—that appellant’ s brief is due on or befor e F ebrua

ry 22, 2016.

See Fay v. Texas A& M Uni v. , No. 03-15-00521- CV, 2015 WL 7695211 1 (Tex. App.—Austin Nov. 25, 2015, no pet. h.).I t is ordere d on J anuar y 21, 2016.

Be fore Chief Justice Rose, Jus tices Pemberton a nd Field

2
Ulysses WOODFAULK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4127

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Barbara Ann KELLY, Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Appellee.

No. 1D17-3996

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

DISMISSED.
Joseph MCDONALD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2432

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 17, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Odyssey BURE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1884

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.