alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 37 (Thursday, February 24, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 10394]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03949]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: February 24, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
February 10, 2022, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service 
Contract 214 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2022-39, CP2022-46.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2022-03949 Filed 2-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 13

- 47 V

Filed: July 31, 2014

Not for P ublication

*************************************

G LENN HENDERSON, *

*

Petitioner

, * Attorneys’ fees and costs decision b ased on

* s tipulation of f

act

v. *

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

*

*************************************

Edward M. Kraus

, Chicago

, I L, for petitioner.

Gordon E. Shemin , Washington, DC, for respondent.

MILLMAN, Special Master

DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS ’ FEES AND COSTS 1

On July 3 1 , 2014 , the parties filed a stipulation of fact in which they agreed on an

appropriate amount for attorneys’ fees and costs in this case

.

I n accordance with t he General Order #9 r equiremen t, petitioner assert s that he did not

incur any costs in pursuit of his petition. Petitioner submitted his request for attorneys’ fees and

costs to respondent. During informal discussions, respondent ra ised objections t o certain items in

petitioner’ s app lication

. Based on these objections, petitioner amend s his application for

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation f or the special master’ s action in this

case, the special master intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States Court of Federal

Claims’ s website, in accordance with the E

- Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107

- 347, 116 Stat. 2899,

2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). Vaccine Rule 18(b) states that all decisions of the special masters will be made

available to the public unless they contain trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is

privileged and confidential, or medical or similar information whose disclosure would constitute a clearl y

unwarranted invasion of privacy. When such a decision is filed, petitioner has 14 days to identify and

move to redact such information prior to the document = s disclosure. If the special master, upon review,

agrees that the identified material fits with in the banned categories listed above, the special master shall

redact such material from public access.2

attor ne ys’ fees and costs to $ 55 ,000.00

. Respondent does not object to this amount. The

undersigned finds this amount to be reasonable. Accordingly, the court awards $ 55 ,000.00

, representing reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and costs. The award shall be in the form of a

chec k payable jointly to petitioner and petitioner ’ s counsel, Edward Kraus, in the amount of

$ 55 ,000.00

.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the

court is directed to enter judgment herewith. 2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 31, 2014 s/ Laura D. Millman

Laura D. Millman

Special Master

2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party , either separately or

jointly, filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Depomed, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Carl A. Pelzel,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
|   |   | Date:  August 6, 2010    |
|--------|--------|--------------------------|
|   |   |                     |
|   |   |                     |
|   |   | /s/  Carl A. Pelzel      |
|   |   | Carl  A. Pelzel          |
|   |   | President  and           |
|   |   | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Santos Modesto OCHOA-ZAMBRANO, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-41582 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed August 18, 2017

Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Santos Modesto Ochoa-Zambrano, Pro Se

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Santos Modesto Ochoa-Zambrano has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Ochoa-Zambrano has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivo-lous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under *835the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Lazlo V. Keviczky, Respondent, *v.*Isadore Lorber et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

Submitted Hay 17, 1943;

decided May 27, 1943.

Motions for reargument denied, with ten dollars costs and, necessary printing disbursements. (See 290 N. Y. 297.)
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6810 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6810

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 518 North Ridgewood Drive in Sebring, Florida, as the ``U.S. Army 
       Air Corps Major Thomas B. McGuire Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. U.S. ARMY AIR CORPS MAJOR THOMAS B. MCGUIRE POST OFFICE 
              BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 518 North Ridgewood Drive in Sebring, Florida, shall be 
known and designated as the ``U.S. Army Air Corps Major Thomas B. 
McGuire Post Office Building''.
    (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 ``U.S. Army 
Air Corps Major Thomas B. McGuire Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 3, 2024.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 6810

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 518 North Ridgewood Drive in Sebring, Florida, as the ``U.S. Army 
       Air Corps Major Thomas B. McGuire Post Office Building''.
```
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 of  CytoGenix,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 1O-Q for the period  ended  March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Lex
Cowsert, 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 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 result of  operations of the
Company.


/s/ Lex Cowsert
---------------
Lex Cowsert, PH.D.
Chief Executive Officer


May 20, 2009
# Journal officiel C 19A/2014

| | ISSN 1977-0936
  doi:10.3000/19770936.CA2014.019.fre |
| --- | --- |
| Journal officiel
  de l'Union européenne | C 19A |
| | |
| Édition de langue française | Communications et informations | 57e année22 janvier 2014 |

ISSN 1977-0936

doi:10.3000/19770936.CA2014.019.fre

Journal officiel

de l'Union européenne

C 19A

Édition de langue française

Communications et informations

57e année22 janvier 2014

---

| Numéro d'information | Sommaire | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Avis |
| | PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES |
| | Agence européenne des médicaments |
| 2014/C 019A/01 | Notification d'annulation | 1 |

Numéro d'information

Sommaire

page

V   Avis

PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES

Agence européenne des médicaments

2014/C 019A/01

Notification d'annulation

1

HISTORIQUE DES JOURNAUX OFFICIELS, SÉRIE A CONCOURS

Vous trouverez ci-dessous la liste des JO C A publiés dans l'année en cours.

Sauf indication contraire, les Journaux officiels sont publiés dans toutes les versions linguistiques.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 6 | |
| 11 | |
| 19 | |

5

6

11

19

| FR | |
| --- | --- |

FR

---

V Avis

PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES

Agence européenne des médicaments

| 22.1.2014 | FR | Journal officiel de l'Union européenne | CA 19/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2014

FR

Journal officiel de l'Union européenne

CA 19/1

---

Notification d'annulation

(2014/C 19 A/01)

L'Agence européenne des médicaments a décidé d'annuler les procédures de sélection suivantes:

| — | EMA/CA/S/039: agent contractuel (durée limitée), soutien scientifique à la surveillance européenne de la consommation des antimicrobiens à usage vétérinaire (ESVAC) (FG IV) (1) |
| --- | --- |

—

EMA/CA/S/039: agent contractuel (durée limitée), soutien scientifique à la surveillance européenne de la consommation des antimicrobiens à usage vétérinaire (ESVAC) (FG IV) (1)

| — | EMA/CA/S/040: agent contractuel (durée limitée), secrétariat scientifique pour les avis de la Commission européenne concernant la résistance aux antimicrobiens, département médicaments à usage vétérinaire (FG IV) (2) |
| --- | --- |

—

EMA/CA/S/040: agent contractuel (durée limitée), secrétariat scientifique pour les avis de la Commission européenne concernant la résistance aux antimicrobiens, département médicaments à usage vétérinaire (FG IV) (2)

---

(1)  JO C 320 A du 6.11.2013, p. 2.

(2)  Voir la note 1 de bas de page.

---
October 27, 2015

Mr. Garrett Hayes

Aqua Survey, Inc.

469 Barbertown Point Breeze Road

Flemington, NJ 08822

Dear Mr . Hayes :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption

. It

explains why we can not process your request a nd what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can n o t Process Your Request

We received your May 29, 2015, exemption request on behalf of Aqua Survey, Inc. filed in

D ocket No

. FAA− 20 15

− 2950 , but we are unable to process your request any further. Your

petition does no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider

the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html . This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal

Aviation A dministration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemptio n.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267

- 2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure s34
**SUBSERVICER
      1123 CERTIFICATION**








Re:
      .P.
      Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-CIBC17 (the "Trust"),


Commercial
      Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-CIBC17; Subservicing


Agreement
      dated as of November 28, 2006





I,
      Michael J. Myers, certify that:





I
      am
      responsible for reviewing the activities performed by NorthMarq Capital, Inc.,
      as Subservicer under the aforesaid Subservicing Agreement.





A
      review
      of the Subservicer's activities during the Reporting Period (the calendar year
      ending December 31, 2006) and of the Subservicer's performance under the
      aforesaid Subservicing Agreement has been made under by
      supervision.





To
      the
      best of my knowledge, based on such review, NorthMarq, as Subservicer, has
      fulfilled all of its obligations under the Subservicing Agreement in all
      material respects throughout the Reporting Period, except as specifically set
      forth below, or on the attachment:

















NorthMarq
      Capital, Inc.







By: /s/
      Michael J. Myers


Name:  Michael
      J.


Title:  EVP/CAO


Date:  2-12-07
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906





Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of deltathree, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:





The Annual Report for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the "Form 10-K") of the Company 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: March 17, 2011
/s/ Arie RandArie Rand, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal

Financial Officer)





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.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 10.2

JPS INDUSTRIES, INC.

555 North Pleasantburg Drive
Suite 202
Greenville, S.C. 29807-2181

Phone: (864) 239-3916
Fax: (864) 271-9939

Michael L. Fulbright
Chairman, President and
Chief Executive Officer



May 8, 2002



Mr. Charles R. Tutterow
18315 Invergorden Lane
Cornelius, NC 28031

Dear Mr. Tutterow:

         We are writing with respect to your employment agreement (the
"Agreement") with JPS Industries, Inc. (the "Company") dated May 30, 2000, a
copy of which is attached hereto. The Company desires to amend the Agreement by
extending the term of employment in the Agreement from May 31, 2002 to December
31, 2002. All references in the Agreement to May 31, 2002, shall hereafter be
deemed to be December 31, 2002, and all references to the "Employment Period"
shall hereafter be deemed to end on December 31, 2002. All other terms,
definitions and conditions in the Agreement shall remain unchanged, and the
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect with no changes other than as
specifically referenced herein.

         If the foregoing is satisfactory to you, please so indicate by signing
and returning to the Company the enclosed copy of this letter agreement.

                                              JPS INDUSTRIES, INC.

                                              /s/ Michael L. Fulbright
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              President and C.E.O.

ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO:

/s/ Charles R. Tutterow
---------------------------
Charles R. Tutterow





F-451-J-1
#### Uri Campos AVALOS, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 15-70919

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 14, 2016 *

Filed December 20, 2016

Christopher Eric Coleman, Esquire, Attorney, Pacific Law Group, Huntington Park, CA, for Petitioner

Carmel Aileen Morgan, Esquire, Trial Attorney, OIL, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Uri Campos Avalos, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the *967Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s order of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Campos Avalos fails to raise, and therefore has waived, any challenge to the agency’s determinations. *See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder,*706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (a petitioner waives a contention by failing to raise it in the opening brief).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Campos Avalos’ unexhausted contentions that his removal proceedings should be reopened and that he established he would be persecuted due to his expressed views against the government of Mexico. *See Tijani v. Holder,*628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (the court lacks jurisdiction to consider legal claims not presented in an alien’s administrative proceedings before the agency).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Campos Avalos’ contention that his case should be remanded for consideration of prosecutorial discretion. *See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder,*688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012) (order).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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  of  CytoGenix,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 1O-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Malcolm
H. Skolnick,  Chief Executive  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 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 result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Malcolm H. Skolnick
------------------------
MALCOLM H. SKOLNICK
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


August 14, 2003
DISMISS and Opinion Filed February 13, 2024 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-01216-CV IN THE INTEREST OF G.F.G. AND G.K.G., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 59th Judicial District Court Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. FA-21-1367

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Garcia, Breedlove, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Kennedy The filing fee, docketing statement, and clerk’s record in this case have not been filed. By postcards dated Dece mber 4, 2023, and December 20, 2023, we notified appellant the $205 filin g fee was due. We directed appellant to remit the filing fee within ten days an d expressly cautioned appella nt that failure to do so would result in dismissal of the appeal. Also by postcard dated December 4, 2023, we informed appellant the docketing statemen t was due and directed appellant to file the docketing statement within ten days. By letter dated Ja nuary 2, 2024, we informed appellant the clerk’s record had not been filed because appellant had not paid for the clerk’s record. We directed appellant to provide, within ten days,–2– verification she (1) had either paid for or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record, or (2) was entitled to proceed wit hout payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that failure to do so would result in the dismi ssal of this appeal without further notice. To date, appellant has not paid the filing fee, provided the required documentation, or otherwise co rresponded with the Court regarding the status of this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(b), (c).

231216F.P05 /Nanc y Kenned y/ NANCY KENNEDY JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

IN THE INTEREST OF G.F.G. AND G.K.G., CHILDREN

No. 05-23-01216-CV On Appeal from the 59th Judicial District Court, Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. FA-21-1367. Opinion delivered by Justice Kennedy. Justices Breedlove and Garcia participating. In accordance with this Court’s opini on of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. Judgment entered February 13, 2024