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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6468 

To provide that certain water beads products shall be considered banned 

hazardous products under section 8 of the Consumer Product Safety 

Act, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 21, 2023 

Mr. PALLONE (for himself, Ms. KELLY of Illinois, and Ms. PETTERSEN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide that certain water beads products shall be considered banned hazardous products under section 8 of the 

Consumer Product Safety Act, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Ban Water Beads 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CERTAIN WATER BEADS PRODUCTS CONSIDERED 

7 BANNED HAZARDOUS PRODUCTS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—On and after the date that is 180 

9 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a water 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6468 IH

1 beads product, without regard to the date of manufacture 

2 or importation, shall be considered a banned hazardous 

3 product under section 8 of the Consumer Product Safety 

4 Act (15 U.S.C. 2057). 

5 (b) ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS.—If the Consumer 

6 Product Safety Commission determines such action would 

7 eliminate or adequately reduce a risk of injury, the Com8 mission may promulgate, under section 553 of title 5, 

9 United States Code, regulations to carry out 1 or more 

10 of the following: 

11 (1) With respect to paragraph (1) of subsection 

12 (c) of this section, adding to the list of materials 

13 that compose a water beads product. 

14 (2) With respect to paragraph (2) of such sub15 section, adding to the list of products that are de16 fined as water beads products. 

17 (3) With respect to paragraph (3) of such sub18 section, adding to the list of product categories ap19 plicable to water beads products. 

20 (c) WATER BEADS PRODUCT DEFINED.—In this sec21 tion, the term ‘‘water beads product’’ means a consumer 

22 product that— 

23 (1) is composed, in whole or in part, of water24 absorbing superabsorbent polymers, such as 

25 polyacrylamides and polyacrylates; 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 6468 IH

1 (2) at the point of sale to a consumer, contains 

2 at least 1 individual bead that can— 

3 (A) fit entirely within the cylinder de4 scribed in section 1501.4 of title 16, Code of 

5 Federal Regulations; and 

6 (B) through water absorption, expand to a 

7 size of at least 3 millimeters (in 1 or more di8 mensions); and 

9 (3) is designed, intended, or marketed as— 

10 (A) a toy (as such term is defined in sec11 tion 3.1.91 of ASTM F963–17 (Standard Con12 sumer Safety Specification for Toy Safety), or 

13 any successor to such document); 

14 (B) educational material; or 

15 (C) art material or art material product 

16 (as such term is defined in section 23(b)(1) of 

17 the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (15 

18 U.S.C. 1277(b)(1))). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
EXHIBIT 11

                         WESTWOOD FINANCIAL CORPORATION

              STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                    Three Months Ended            Six Months Ended
                                    September 30, 1995            September 30, 1996
                                    ------------------            ------------------


<S>                                        <C>                    <C>      
      Net Loss  ....................       ($150,000)            $  19,000
                                           =========              ========


      Primary and fully diluted

      Average shares outstanding....         646,700               549,038
                                             =======               =======


      Per share amount..............          ($0.23)            $    0.03
                                              ======                ======
</TABLE>



Earnings per share of common stock for the three and six months ended  September
30, 1996 have been determined by dividing net income for the six month period by
the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding.
AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT ACADEMY, P.O. BO X 619617, DALLAS/FORT WORTH AIRPORT, TEXAS 75261-9617 February 18, 2011

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of the Chief Counsel Attention: Rules Docket (AGC-10)

Docket No. 27712 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591-0001

Exemption 6916, Docket No. FAA-2001-8878

Ladies/Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) §11.25 American Airlines petitions the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an extension of and amendment to Exemption 6916 (Docket No. FAA-2001-8878). This exemption is due to expire July 31,

2011.

Exemption 6916 provides relief from FAR §121.434(c)(1)(ii) to permit American Airlines to substitute a qualified and aut horized check airman in place of an FAA inspector, to observe a qualifying pilot in co mmand (PIC), while that PIC is performing prescribed duties during at least one flight leg, that includes a takeoff and a landing when completing initial or upgrade training as specified in §121.434.

The conditions and circumstances, in regard to public interest and equivalent level of safety, which warranted the original grant of exemption, continue to exist. This exemption has been in use for almost twelve years with no known compromise of safety.

In accordance with the provisions of FAR §11.27 (j)(3)(i), Exceptions of Publication of Summary of Petition for Exemption, American Airlines requests that a finding of good cause be made for waiving publication in the Federal Register . Since similar extensions have been granted to other Part 121 Air Ca rriers, no precedents will be set by granting the requested relief. Therefore, American requests that the publication and comment period be waived.

A summary of this petition is attached as required by FAR §11.25. Please advise if you require any addition information in order to evaluate or act on this petition.

Sincerely,

Christopher K. Broom Managing Director Flight TrainingDocket FAA-2001-8878

Attachment February 18, 2011

SUMMARY OF AMERICAN AIRLINES PETITION

Petitioner: American Airlines (AAL)

Regulations Affected: FAR § 121.434 (c)(1)(ii).

Description of Relief Sought: American Airlines requests an extension and amendment of Exemption No. 6916 (Docket No. 29207) which is due to expire on July 31, 2011. This exemption provides relief from FAR §121.434(c)(1)(ii) to permit AAL to substitute a qualified and authorized check airman in place of an FAA inspector to observe a qualifying pilot in command (PIC) while that PIC is performing prescribed duties during at least one flight leg that includes a takeoff and a landing when completing initial or upgrade training as specified in § 121.424.
#### Kay F. PASCHAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Leon LOTT, in his individual and official capacity; Stan Smith, in his individual and official capacity; Howard Hughes, in his individual and official capacity; Heidi Scott, a/k/a Heidi Jackson, in her individual and official capacity; Richland County, South Carolina, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-7393

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 27, 2017

Decided: May 5, 2017

S. Jahue Moore, MOORE TAYLOR LAW FIRM, P.A., West Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Andrew F. Linde-mann, Robert D. Garfield, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before MOTZ, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kay F. Paschal appeals from the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to Defendants in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights action. On appeal, Paschal questions whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment to Defendants. However, because Paschal has not presented this claim in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A) (“[T]he [appellant’s] argument ... must contain ... appellant’s contentions and the reasons for them, with citations to the authorities and parts of the record on which the appellant relies.”), we deem it abandoned. *Jacobs v. N.C. Admin. Office of the Courts,*780 F.3d 562, 568 n.7 (4th Cir. 2015); *Wahi v. Charleston Area Med. Cir., Inc.,*562 F.3d 599, 607 (4th Cir. 2009); *Williams v. Giant Food Inc,,*370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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 the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Andrew Stuart Zizmor, Admitted November 16, 1988, at a Term of the Appellate Division, Second Department.

[772 NYS2d 805]

Respondent reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof. No opinion. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Ellerin and Williams, JJ. *[See*257 AD2d 127 (1999).]
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 Annual Report of Blockbuster Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended January 6, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report),
I, James W. Keyes, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 6, 2008



/s/ James W. KeyesJames W. Keyes Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-11686

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

ALAINA TROCANO,

an individual, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus

MICHAEL VIVALDI,

an individual, 

Defendant-Appellant, 

USCA11 Case: 24-11686 Document: 15-1 Date Filed: 07/02/2024 Page: 1 of 3
2 Opinion of the Court 24-11686

AMERICAN AIRLINES GROUP, INC, 

a foreign profit corporation, et al., 

Defendants.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 2:23-cv-00645-JES-KCD

____________________

Before JILL PRYOR, NEWSOM, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. Defendant Michael Vivaldi appeals the district court’s May 

16, 2024 order. That order denied Vivaldi’s motion for sanctions 

and his request that the claims against him, which were previously 

dismissed without prejudice, be dismissed with prejudice or that he 

be awarded attorney’s fees. That order is not final because claims 

against defendant American Airlines, Inc. remain pending. See 28 

U.S.C. § 1291; Supreme Fuels Trading FZE v. Sargeant, 689 F.3d 1244, 

1245-46 (11th Cir. 2012). Furthermore, the order is not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine because the request for sanctions and dismissal with prejudice was connected to 

the merits of the case, and Vivaldi’s request for attorney’s fees is 

effectively reviewable on appeal from the final judgment. See 

USCA11 Case: 24-11686 Document: 15-1 Date Filed: 07/02/2024 Page: 2 of 3
24-11686 Opinion of the Court 3

Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 311 (1995); Richardson-Merrell, Inc. 

v. Koller, 472 U.S. 424, 430-31 (1985). 

No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies 

with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all 

other applicable rules.

USCA11 Case: 24-11686 Document: 15-1 Date Filed: 07/02/2024 Page: 3 of 3
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6389 

To eliminate the reduction in pay of a Federal employee or District of 

Columbia employee as a result of such employee serving as a member 

of the National Guard of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 13, 2023 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To eliminate the reduction in pay of a Federal employee 

or District of Columbia employee as a result of such 

employee serving as a member of the National Guard 

of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘District of Columbia 

5 National Guard Federal Employee Leave Fairness Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6389 IH

1 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON CREDITING AMOUNTS RECEIVED 

2 AGAINST PAY OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEE OR 

3 D.C. EMPLOYEE SERVING AS A MEMBER OF 

4 THE NATIONAL GUARD OF THE DISTRICT OF 

5 COLUMBIA. 

6 The amendment made by section 1109 of title XI of 

7 division A of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

8 Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81) shall apply to any 

9 amounts credited, by operation of section 5519 of title 5, 

10 United States Code, against the pay of an employee or 

11 individual described under section 6323(c) of such title 

12 during the period beginning on May 29, 2020, and ending 

13 on December 26, 2021. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
EX PARTE Ronnie Odell PARKER

CR-16-0589

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

June 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 37 (Thursday, February 24, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 10367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03870]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting 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, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic 
Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, 
pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the 
discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial 
property such as patentable material, and personal information 
concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the 
disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.
    Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and 
Control Special Emphasis Panel; (SEP)--RFA-TS-22-001: Identify and 
Evaluate Potential Risk Factors for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis 
(ALS).
    Date: June 17, 2022
    Time: 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m., EDT.
    Place: Videoconference.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mikel Walters, Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Officer, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, CDC, 
4770 Buford Highway NE, Mailstop F-63, Atlanta, Georgia 30341, 
Telephone (404)639-0913, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1f52487e736b7a6d6c5f7c7b7c31787069"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c18c96a0adb5a4b3b281a2a5a2efa6aeb7">[email protected]</span></a>.
    The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the 
Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
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.

Kalwant Smagh,
Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief 
Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2022-03870 Filed 2-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 31.01**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, W. Michael Long, certify that:
          1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Homestore,Inc.;
          2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
          3. [paragraph intentionally omitted];
          4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
     b) [paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and34-47986]
     c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end ofthe period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
     d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
          5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and
     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.   Date: April 29, 2004      /s/ W. MICHAEL LONG   W. Michael Long
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raymond Antoine SCOTT, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-30239

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 11, 2017 *

Filed April 19, 2017

Michael Wayne Mitchell, Traci Jo Whe-lan, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Office of The U.S. Attorney, Coeur d’Alene, ID, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Nicolas Vernon Vieth, Esquire, Attorney, Vieth Law Offices, Chtd., Coeur d’ Alene, ID, for Defendant-Appellant

Raymond Antoine Scott, Jr., Pro Se

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Raymond Antoine Scott, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 288-month sentence for second-degree murder, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1111(b) and 1153. Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Scott’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Scott the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supple-, mental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Scott waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. *See United States v. Watson,*582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. *See id.*at 988.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 99

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

         I, Dennis R. Sheehan, the Chief Executive Officer of The BISYS Group,
Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form
10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2003 (the "Form
10-Q"), which this certification accompanies, 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 information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Dated:   May 13, 2003

                                          /s/ Dennis R. Sheehan
                                          ----------------------------------
                                           Dennis R. Sheehan



         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to The BISYS Group, Inc. and will be retained by The BISYS Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon
request.






                                       24
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 99

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

         I, Andrew C. Corbin, the Chief Financial Officer of The BISYS Group,
Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form
10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2003 (the "Form
10-Q"), which this certification accompanies, 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 information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Dated:   May 13, 2002

                                               /s/ Andrew C. Corbin
                                               ------------------------------
                                                Andrew C. Corbin



         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to The BISYS Group, Inc. and will be retained by The BISYS Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon
request.






                                       25