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

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. 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: National Institute on Aging Initial Review Group Career Development for Established Investigators and Conference Grants Study Section.

*Date:*                         June 9-10, 2022.                    

*Time:*                         10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Greg Bissonette, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review                               ( print page 17311)                            Branch, National Institute on Aging, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Gateway Building, Suite 2W200, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-1622,                         *bissonettegb@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: March 22, 2022.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-06375 Filed 3-25-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
530 P.2d 375

#### In the Matter of the Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus of George T. Bevins. George T. BEVINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Arizona ex rel. Harold CARDWELL, Warden, Arizona State Prison, Appellee.

No. 2 CA-CIV 1724.

Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 2.

Jan. 15, 1975.

*19George T. Bevins, in pro per.

Bruce E. Babbitt, Atty. Gen., N. Warner Lee, former Atty. Gen. by Teresa S. Thayer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Phoenix, for appellee.

OPINION

HOWARD, Chief Judge.

Appellant filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking a court order to strike all evidence of an allegedly illegal California detainer from his prison records, to place him on the same status as those inmates who do not have a detainer, and to prevent California from placing another detainer against him. Without a hearing, the petition was denied. Because Arizona has chosen not to follow the enlightened lead of the federal courts regarding habeas corpus, we must affirm.

Appellant’s petition sought, in essence, to remove the detainer and its effects. He claimed that the detainer was illegal because it was based on a parole violation warrant as to which, after more than one year, California has failed to hold any hearing, as required by Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 92 S.Ct. 2593, 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972). Such a claim may well have merit in the federal courts either as a habeas corpus petition or a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See, Cooper v. Lockhart, 489 F.2d 308 (8th Cir. 1973); Jones v. Johnston, 368 F.Supp. 571 (D.D.C.1974). Cf., Nelson v. George, 399 U.S. 224, 90 S.Ct. 1963, 26 L.Ed.2d 578 (1970).

However, his claim lacks merit in the state courts. First, the courts of this state have no power whatsoever to order California to remove a detainer. State v. Yanich, 110 Ariz. 172, 516 P.2d 308 (1973). Second, the writ of habeas corpus may not be utilized for the purpose of correcting alleged mistreatment of a prison inmate subsequent to a valid judgment. Foggy v. State ex rel. Eyman, 107 Ariz. 532, 490 P.2d 4 (1971). But see, Wilwording v. Swenson, 404 U.S. 249, 92 S.Ct. 407, 30 L.Ed.2d 418 (1971); Williams v. Richardson, 481 F.2d 358 (8th Cir. 1973). Appellant has been incarcerated at the Arizona State Prison pursuant to a valid judgment. His attack on the effects of the detainer attempts to correct alleged mistreatment. This he may not do. See, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 32.1(d), Comment, 17 A.R.S.

Affirmed.

HATHAWAY' and KRUCKER, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2


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

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), I, Ashley C.
Andersen, President and Acting Chief Financial Officer, of Trudy Corporation do
hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge that:

     1)   The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
          September 30, 2006, being filed with the Securities and Exchange
          Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
          Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
          amended; and

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

This Certification accompanies this Form 10-QSB as an exhibit, but shall not be
deemed as having been filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 or as a separate disclosure document of the Company or the
certifying officer.


                                             /s/ ashley c. andersen
                                             -----------------------------------
Date: November 20, 2006                      Ashley C. Andersen
                                             President, Chief Executive Officer,
                                             Acting Chief Financial Officer

                                       33
Presidential Documents

17141 

Federal Register 

Vol. 87, No. 59 

Monday, March 28, 2022 

Title 3— 

The President 

Proclamation 10351 of March 23, 2022 

Death of Madeleine Korbel Albright 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

Madeleine Albright was a force. She defied convention and broke barriers 

again and again. She was an immigrant fleeing persecution. A refugee in 

need of safe haven. And like so many before her—and after—she was proudly 

American. 

As the devoted mother of three beloved daughters, she worked tirelessly 

raising them while earning her doctorate degree and starting her career 

in American diplomacy. She took her talents first to the Senate as a staffer 

for Senator Edmund Muskie followed by the National Security Council 

under President Carter. And then to the United Nations where she served 

as United States Ambassador, and ultimately, made history as our first 

woman Secretary of State, appointed by President Clinton. A scholar, teacher, 

bestselling author, and later accomplished business woman, she always believed America was the indispensable Nation, and inspired the next generation of public servants to follow her lead, including countless women leaders 

around the world. Madeleine was always a force for goodness, grace, and 

decency—and for freedom. 

As a mark of respect for former Secretary of State Madeleine Korbel Albright 

and her life of service to our Nation, I hereby order, by the authority 

vested in me as President of the United States by the Constitution and 

the laws of the United States of America, that the flag of the United States 

shall be flown at half-staff at the White House and upon all public buildings 

and grounds, at all military posts and naval stations, and on all naval 

vessels of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia and throughout 

the United States and its Territories and possessions until sunset on March 

27, 2022. I also direct that the flag shall be flown at half-staff for the 

same length of time at all United States embassies, legations, consular offices, 

and other facilities abroad, including all military facilities and naval vessels 

and stations. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PREZ DOC
17142 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2022 / Presidential Documents 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-third 

day of March, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-two, and of 

the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and 

forty-sixth. 

[FR Doc. 2022–06614 

Filed 3–25–22; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 3395–F2–P 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PREZ DOCBIDEN.EPS</GPH>
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANTTO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**


In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of Buckeye Ventures, Inc. (the
“Corporation”) on Form 10-QSB for this quarterly report, as filed with the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Paul D.
        Hancock, Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors and Finance Committee Chairman
        of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant
        to§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:


(1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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





/s/ Paul D. Hancock


Paul
        D.
        Hancock
 Vice
        Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chairman of the Finance
        Committee
 November
        20, 2006
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Stevie NORWOOD, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-51185 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed February 20, 2018

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Stevie Norwood, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, CLEMENT, and HO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Stevie Norwood 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). Norwood 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 nonfrivolous 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 the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Mr. Michael Thomas PAUL, Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Acting BY AND THROUGH the CITY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD (CPS ENERGY), Defendant-Appellee

No. 17-50272

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed February 16, 2018

Michael Thomas Paul, Pro Se

Jeffrey Todd Harvey, Kayla Tanner, Jackson Walker, L.L.P., San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellee

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Michael Thomas Paul has moved for the appointment of counsel and for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP) from the district court’s dismissal of his civil action for lack of federal subject-matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim under federal law. Because the district court certified that the appeal is not in good faith, Paul’s IFP motion “must be directed solely to the trial court’s reasons for the certification decision,” *Baugh v. Taylor,*117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997), and our inquiry “is limited to whether the appeal involves ‘legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not frivolous).’ ” *Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (citation omitted). We may rule on the merits of the appeal or dismiss it “when it is apparent that an appeal would be merit-less.” *Baugh,*117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; *see*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Paul expressly declines to identify any non-frivolous ground on which to appeal the dismissal of his claims. Instead, he contends that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to appoint counsel because he could have presented valid claims with the assistance of counsel. We will not overturn a district court’s decision regarding appointment of counsel unless the appellant shows a “clear abuse of discretion.” *Cupit v. Jones,*835 F.2d 82, 86 (5th Cir. 1987). It may be appropriate to appoint counsel for an indigent litigant in *445exceptional circumstances “if doing so would advance the proper administration of justice.” *Ulmer v. Chancellor,*691 F.2d 209, 213 (5th Cir. 1982). Paul identifies no such circumstances. He has made coherent allegations but fails to accept that those allegations do not state any claim that arises under federal law or invokes federal jurisdiction. *Cf. MSOF Corp. v. Exxon Corp.,*295 F.3d 485, 490 (5th Cir. 2002) (holding that alleging violations of federal regulations in addition to state law claims “does not suffice to render the action one arising under federal law”).

Paul fails either to identify a non-frivolous issue for appeal or to show that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to appoint counsel. His motions for leave to appeal IFP and for appointment of counsel are DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. *See Baugh,*117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 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 the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-7044

STEVEN PREMINGER,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,

Respondent.

On petition for review pursuant to 38 U.S.C. Section 502.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs' motion for an extension

of time, until April 13, 2009, to file the certified list and administrative record,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted.

FOR THE COURT

APR 9 2009	/s/ Jan Horbalv

Date	 Jan Horbaly

Clerk	FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

cc:	Scott J. Rafferty, Esq.

Jane W. Vanneman, Esq.	

APR 0 9 2009

s8

CLERK
jAM£5 O. ·Buoor' 0JDwtu.

Al101lH£Y CiEN£RAl.

_..- _~~~~~~~~--~~---

----e, _ _. '.' .C-' !%_Ia-"U DEPARTMENT "f ')!iauisiana OF JUSTICE

.O:"!'OX"flOO~' ~~--­

BATON ROUGE

7()l1()4..900.5

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S STATEMENT FOR FINAL

AUTHORIZATION FOR CHANGES TO THE FEDERAL

RCRA PROGRAM FROM JULY 2008

THROUGH NOVEMBER 2009

RCRA CLUSTER XVIII

I hereby certify, pursuant to my authority as Attorney General ofthe State ofLouisiana, through

undersigned colUlsel and in accordance with Section 3006(b) ofllie Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act. as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments ofl984 (42 USC 6901 et WI.). and 40

CFR 271 that in my opinion the laws ofthe State of Louisiana provide adequate authority to carry out the

revised program set forth in the revised ~Program Description" submitted by the Louisiana Department of

Environmental Quality. The specific authorities provided are contained in statutes or regulations lawfully in

effect at the time this Statement is signed. The regulatory provisions for which the state of Louisiana is

seeking authorization are documented in the attached Revision Checklists 209, 216, 217 and 218.

Differences between the state ofLouisiana provisions and the Federal provisions are noted on the Revision

Checklists 209, 216, 217 and 218. In addition, the State is requesting authorization for the Remediation and

Correction Action Program (RECAP) and other regulatory requirements that may be more stringent or

broader in scope than federal requirements. The State regulations may be found in the Environmental

Regulatory Code produced by the Louisiana Department of Enviromnental Quality, ERC Title 33, Part V.

Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials, 2009 edition and ERe. Title 33, Part 1. Office ofthe Secretary,

Chapter 13. This certification supplements my or my predecessor's certification of October 9, 2008.

STATIITORY CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that statutes addressed in previous authorization applications submitted to the

Environmental Protection Agency have not been amended, modified or revised. Revisions have

-------Jbeen-made-to..the..Statutes,..huLnone thai speci6ca.Jly_affeet Ihe-RCR.A..prograIIL...Ihe..statoI.y.'::- _

authorities for the State ofLouisiana are documented in the Louisiana RCRA Statutory Checklist

dated August, 2002.' .

CERTIFICATION REGARDING LEGISLATIVE, REGULATORY OR POLICY IN1TIATIVES

I hereby certify that the State ofLouisiana has not enacted any legislation or implemented any

regulatory or policy initiatives that could potentially limit or interfere with the authority to

implement, administer, or enforce the authorized hazardous waste program.
------------------------ --------------_._- -------

CERTIFICATION REGARDING JUDICIAL DECISIONS

There have nOl been any judicial decisions that limit or interfere with the State's authority to

implement, administer, or enforce the authori r ou

S D_ D¥" CALDWELL

ATIORNEY GENERAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA
**EXHIBIT ITEM 32.2**

 

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

 

The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

 

August 19, 2010

 

Bruce N. Warner, the Chief Financial Officer of Northern CaliforniaBancorp, Inc. certifies:

 

c.               that thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

d.              thatinformation contained in this Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2010 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Northern California Bancorp, Inc.

 

 
|   | /s/  Bruce N. Warner         |
|--------|------------------------------|
|   | Bruce N. Warner              |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer and |
|   | Principal Accounting Officer |

 

----
<PAGE>   1

EXHIBIT 11

                     COMPUTATION OF WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES
                       OUTSTANDING AND EARNINGS PER SHARE
          (in thousands of dollars except share and per share amounts)
                                   (unaudited)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                             THIRD QUARTER                 NINE MONTHS
                                       --------------------------   -------------------------
                                           1997          1996           1997          1996
                                       ------------  ------------   ------------  ------------
<S>                                       <C>           <C>            <C>           <C>      
    Actual common shares
    Outstanding                           3,896,937     4,679,697      3,896,937     4,679,697

    Weighted average common
    Shares issued upon
    exercise                                 52,795        22,500         39,544        11,311
    Of stock options

    Stock repurchase                             --     (705,300)             --     (705,300)

    Common shares issuable
    under outstanding stock
    Options                                 113,315            --        113,315            --

    Total weighted average
    Shares outstanding                    4,063,047     3,996,897      4,049,796     3,985,708
                                       ============  ============    ===========   ===========

    Net income                         $        877  $        870    $     2,517   $       162
                                       ============  ============    ===========   ===========

    Net income per share               $       0.22  $       0.22   $       0.62   $      0.04
                                       ============  ============   ============   ===========
</TABLE>
No. 11-10801.

No. 11-10889.

No. 11-10924.

No. 11-10930.

No. 11-10933.

No. 11-10995.

No. 11-11054.

No. 11-11062.

No. 12-204.

No. 12-5063.

No. 12-5104.

No. 12-5132.

No. 12-5425.

No. 12-5564.

No. 12-5566.

#### In re Norman; In re Scott; In re Spillman; In re Reneau; In re Eastland; In re Hickingbottom; In re Greyer; In re Kim; In re Vadde; In re Ortiz; In re Sterling; In re Williams; In re Evans; In re Essex; In re Dixon; *812In re Abrajham; In re Buchanan; In re Smithback; In re Batten; and In re Wright.

No. 12-5717.

No. 12-5719.

No. 12-5725.

No. 12-5954.

No. 12-6050.

Petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.