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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Sleep Disorders Research Advisory Board, April 7, 2022, 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Virtual Meeting, which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on March 09, 2022, V 87 Vol. 46, Page 13302, FR Doc No. 2022-04982.                

                    Meeting is being amended to change the telephone call in number to 1-669-254-5252 (                    *Meeting ID:*                     161 532 8417                     *Passcode:*                     330488). The meeting is open to the public.                

Dated: March 16, 2022.

David W. Freeman,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-05969 Filed 3-21-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### Stewart MANLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 17-7418

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 19, 2017

Decided: December 22, 2017

Stewart Manley, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Stewart Manley appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a default judgment and granting the Government’s motion to dismiss his Federal Tort Claims Act complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Manley v. United States,*No. 1:16-cv-00363-AJT-IDD, 2017 WL 4401456 (E.D. Va. Sept. 29, 2017), 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*
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 3 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 3

            Fixing the hour of daily meeting of the Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 4, 1995

 Mr. Cochran submitted the following resolution; which was considered 
                             and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
            Fixing the hour of daily meeting of the Senate.

    Resolved, That the hour of daily meeting of the Senate be 12 
o'clock meridian unless otherwise ordered.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

OF PATINA OIL & GAS CORPORATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.ss.1350



1. I, Thomas J. Edelman, Chief Executive Officer of Patina Oil & Gas Corporation (the Company), hereby certify to the best of my knowledge that the accompanying report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly
period ending March 31, 2004 and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Report) by the Company fully complies with the requirements of
that section.



2. I further certify to the best of my knowledge that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



By:

/s/ Thomas J. EdelmanName: Date:

Thomas J. Edelman April 29, 2004




The foregoing certification is
being furnished solely 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) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure
document.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to Patina Oil & Gas Corporation and will be retained by Patina Oil & Gas Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio MOSLEY, a/k/a Abdullah Hamid, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7129

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 30, 2018

Decided: February 1, 2018

Antonio Mosley, Appellant Pro Se. William Michael Miller, Melissa Louise Ri-kard, Assistant United States Attorneys, Ann Claire H. Phillips, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: '

Antonio Mosley seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. *15728 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Mosley has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, although we grant Mosley’s motion for leave to file a supplemental informal brief, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Mosley’s motions for bail or release pending appeal, for appointment of counsel, and to hold the Government in default for failure to respond. 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.

*DISMISSED*
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16085-16089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05858]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Foreign Assets Control


Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets 
Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have 
been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked 
Persons List based on OFAC's determination that one or more applicable 
legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property 
subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. 
persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with 
them.

DATES: See Supplementary Information section for applicable date(s).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OFAC: Andrea Gacki, Director, tel.: 
202-622-2490; Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-
2420; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant 
Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; or the Assistant 
Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Availability

    The Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List and 
additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available 
on OFAC's website (https://www.treasury.gov/ofac).

Notice of OFAC Actions

    On March 15, 2022, OFAC determined that the property and interests 
in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following persons are 
blocked under the relevant sanctions authorities listed below.
BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P

[[Page 16086]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN21MR22.000


[[Page 16087]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN21MR22.001


[[Page 16088]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN21MR22.002



[[Page 16089]]


    Dated: March 15, 2022.
Andrea M. Gacki,
Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the 
Treasury.
[FR Doc. 2022-05858 Filed 3-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AL-C
# Official Journal C 334/8 Oc

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 334 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 638 October 2020 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 334

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 638 October 2020

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Partnership Agreement concluded between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Union and its Member States, of the other part |
| | 37th session — Bucharest (Romania), 18-20 March 2019. |
| 2020/C 334/01 | Minutes of the sitting of Monday, 18 March 2019 | 1 |
| 2020/C 334/02 | Minutes of the morning sitting of Tuesday, 19 March 2019 | 5 |
| 2020/C 334/03 | Minutes of the afternoon sitting of Tuesday, 19 March 2019 | 8 |
| 2020/C 334/04 | Minutes of the morning sitting of Wednesday, 20 March 2019 | 11 |
| 2020/C 334/05 | Minutes of the afternoon sitting of Wednesday, 20 March 2019 | 14 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Partnership Agreement concluded between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Union and its Member States, of the other part

37th session — Bucharest (Romania), 18-20 March 2019.

37th session — Bucharest (Romania), 18-20 March 2019.

2020/C 334/01

Minutes of the sitting of Monday, 18 March 2019

1

2020/C 334/02

Minutes of the morning sitting of Tuesday, 19 March 2019

5

2020/C 334/03

Minutes of the afternoon sitting of Tuesday, 19 March 2019

8

2020/C 334/04

Minutes of the morning sitting of Wednesday, 20 March 2019

11

2020/C 334/05

Minutes of the afternoon sitting of Wednesday, 20 March 2019

14

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
EX-34 (i)
(logo) ERNST & YOUNG


Ernst & Young LLP
Suite 2800
600 Peachtree Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30308-2215

Phone: (404) 874-8300
www.ey.com

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on
Assessment of Compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB
Servicing Criteria, that ZC Sterling Insurance Agency, Inc. (the Company)
complied with certain servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the
Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the ZC Sterling
Integrated Product Solution (ZIPS) hazard insurance outsourcing Platform
(Platform) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006. The Company has
determined that only certain servicing criteria 1122 (d) 1(iv), 1122 (d) 2(vi),
1122 (d) 4(xi), 1122 (d) 4(xii), and 1122 (d) 4(xiii) are applicable to the
activities performed by them with respect to the Platform covered by this
report. The Company has determined that the remaining servicing criteria set
forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB
are not applicable to the activities performed by them with respect to the
Platform covered by this report. See Appendix A of management's assertion for
the Platform covered by this report. Management is responsible for the Company's
compliance with those servicing criteria, Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the
servicing criteria based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of less than
all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether
the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing
criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the servicing activities
performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our
procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred
either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances
or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by
this report for the Platform. We believe that our examination provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal
determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006
for the ZIPS Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

February 20, 2007


A Member Practice of Ernst & Young Global
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1398 | December 11, 2018 Page 1 of 2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), 

this Memorandum Decision shall not be 

regarded as precedent or cited before any 

court except for the purpose of establishing 

the defense of res judicata, collateral 

estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

Michael Frischkorn

Frischkorn Law LLC

Fortville, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Curtis T. Hill, Jr.

Attorney General of Indiana

Henry A. Flores, Jr.

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

I N T H E

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Crosby Rayne Waller,

Appellant/Cross-Appellee-Petitioner,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee/Cross-Appellant-Respondent

December 11, 2018

Court of Appeals Case No.

18A-CR-1398

Appeal from the Hamilton 

Superior Court

The Honorable William J. Hughes, 

Judge

Trial Court Cause No.

29D03-1611-F5-8588

Crone, Judge.

[1] Crosby Rayne Waller was serving probation after pleading guilty to level 6 

felony battery against a public safety officer. The State alleged, and the trial 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1398 | December 11, 2018 Page 2 of 2

court found, that Waller violated his probation by committing new offenses and 

taking illegal drugs. The court revoked his probation and executed the 

remainder of his previously suspended sentence. Waller failed to perfect an 

appeal within thirty days and sought leave to file a belated appeal pursuant to 

Indiana Post-Conviction Rule 2, which the trial court granted. He asserts that 

the trial court abused its discretion in executing the remainder of his previously 

suspended sentence. The State cross-appeals, to which Waller does not 

respond, claiming that the trial court erred in granting Waller leave to file a 

belated appeal and that we must therefore dismiss. Finding the State’s crossappeal issue dispositive, we dismiss. See Dawson v. State, 943 N.E.2d 1281, 1281 

(Ind. 2011) (adopting this Court’s analysis that Post-Conviction Rule 2 does not 

allow belated appeals from orders revoking probation).

[2] Dismissed.

Vaidik, C.J., and Mathias, J., concur.
----

----

**EXHIBIT        32.2**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION        906 OF THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY        ACT OF 2002**

| (1)    | the                  Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly                  period                  ended September 30, 2007 (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 result of operations of the                  Company.                                                                                                                                                                        |

----

----
#### Adrin Kentral ROME, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HAMPTON ROADS REGIONAL JAIL, Correctional Officers; Sgt. Frey, Correctional Officer; Sgt. Mack, Correctional Officer, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-6760

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 17, 2017

Decided: November 29, 2017

Adrin Kentral Rome, Appellant Pro Se.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Adrin Kentral Rome appeals the district court’s order dismissing his amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2012) for *301failure to state a claim. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. *See*4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Rome’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, Rome has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. *See United States v. Holness,*706 F.3d 579, 592 (4th Cir. 2013); *Williams v. Giant Food Inc.,*370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We deny Rome’s motion to appoint counsel and 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*
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

GREG DUDLEY

,

Appellant

,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 7

- 00125

- CR

Appeal from the

120 th District Court

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 20150D02228 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the State ’ s third motion for extension of time within which to file the

b rief until July 26

, 201 8

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO F ILE

THE STATE ’ S B R IEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Jaime E. Esparza

, the State ’ s attorney, prepare the

State ’ s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before July 26 , 201 8

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 13 th day of June , 20 1 8

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
III

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 321

Authorizing the acceptance of pro bono legal services by a Member of the

Senate challenging the validity of a Federal Statute in a civil action

pursuant to a statute expressly authorizing Members of Congress to

bring such a civil action.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 3, 1996

Mr. BYRD submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Authorizing the acceptance of pro bono legal services by

a Member of the Senate challenging the validity of a

Federal Statute in a civil action pursuant to a statute

expressly authorizing Members of Congress to bring such

a civil action.

1 Resolved, That (a) notwithstanding the provisions of

2 the Standing Rules of the Senate or Senate Resolution

3 508, adopted by the Senate on September 4, 1980, pro

4 bono legal services provided to a Member of the Senate

5 with respect to a civil action challenging the validity of

6 a Federal statute that expressly authorizes a Member to

7 file an action—
2

•SRES 321 ATS

1 (1) shall not be deemed a gift to the Member;

2 (2) shall not be deemed to be a contribution to

3 the office account of the Member; and

4 (3) shall not require the establishment of a

5 legal expense trust fund.

6 (b) The Select Committee on Ethics shall establish

7 regulations providing for the public disclosure of informa8 tion relating to pro bono legal services performed as au9 thorized by this resolution.

Æ
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 25

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative

to equal rights for women and men.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 10), 1995

Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mrs.

BOXER, Mr. BRADLEY, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. COHEN, Mr.

DASCHLE, Mr. DODD, Mr. DORGAN, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mrs. FEINSTEIN,

Mr. GLENN, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. HATFIELD, Mr. HOLLINGS, Mr. INOUYE,

Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. JOHNSTON, Mrs. KASSEBAUM, Mr. KERRY, Mr.

LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Ms. MIKULSKI, Ms.

MOSELEY-BRAUN, Mr. MOYNIHAN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. PACKWOOD, Mr.

PELL, Mr. ROBB, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. SIMON, Ms.

SNOWE, Mr. SPECTER, and Mr. WELLSTONE) introduced the following

joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on

the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States relative to equal rights for women and men.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the follow4 ing article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitu5 tion of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents
2

•SJ 25 IS

1 and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by

2 the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

3 ‘‘ARTICLE—

4 ‘‘SECTION 1. Equality of rights under the law shall

5 not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any

6 State on account of sex.

7 ‘‘SECTION 2. The Congress shall have the power to

8 enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this

9 article.

10 ‘‘SECTION 3. This amendment shall take effect two

11 years after the date of ratification.’’.

Æ