alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 61 (Monday, March 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 15160]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8045]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Title and Associated Form: Department of Defense Security 
Agreement, Appendage to the Department of Defense Security Agreement, 
Certificate Pertaining to Foreign Interests, DD Forms 441, 441-1, and 
441s, OMB Number 0704-0194.
    Type of Request: Reinstatement; Emergency Processing requested with 
a shortened public comment period ending April 7, 1997. An approval 
date of April 14, 1997, is requested.
    Number of Respondents: 6,225.
    Responses Per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 6,225.
    Average Burden Per Response: 36 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 3,735.
    Needs and Uses: DD Forms 441, 441-1, and 441s are legally binding 
contractual documents that allow contractors access to classified 
information and obligates said contractors to adhere to the security 
requirements as prescribed in DoD 5220.22-M, ``National Industrial 
Security Program Operating Manual.'' These requirements are necessary 
in order to preserve and maintain national security through 
establishing standards to prevent the improper disclosure of classified 
information.
    Affected Public: Business or Other For-Profit.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to Obtain or Retain Benefits.
    OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Edward C. Springer.
    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Mr. Springer at the Office of Management 
and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Robert Cushing.
    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal 
should be sent to Mr. Cushing, WHS/DIOR, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302.

    Dated: March 25, 1997.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-8045 Filed 3-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
No. 12-5521.

#### King *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-03-00596-CV

Larry Johnson, Appellant

v.

The Court of Criminal Appeals, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 53RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. GN300775, HONORABLE SUZANNE COVINGTON, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Because appellant Larry Johnson has failed to file an appell ant’s brief, we will

dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b).

The Clerk of t his Court filed the clerk’s record in this cause on October 2, 2003.

Thus, appellant’s brief was due November 3, 2003. S ee id. 38.6(a)(1). By postcard dated December

4, 2003, the Clerk of this Court notified the parties that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want

of prosecution unless appellant tendered a motion by December 9, 2003, reasonably explaining the

failure to file a brief. S ee id. 38.8(a)(1). Appellant has submitted neither a brief nor a motion

reasonably explaining the failure to file a brief.2 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution on our own motion. S ee

id. 42.3(b).

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Justices Kidd, Puryear and Pemberton

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: January 29, 2004
H. Res. 1046 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 29, 2020. 

Whereas the 19th Amendment extended the franchise to 

women across the United States; 

Whereas August 18, 2020, marks the centennial of the ratification of the 19th Amendment by three-fourths of the 

States; 

Whereas August 26, 2020, marks the centennial of the 19th 

Amendment becoming part of the Constitution of the 

United States; 

Whereas the centennial of the ratification of the 19th Amendment is a pivotal chapter in the history of American democracy; 

Whereas the ratification of the 19th Amendment marks the 

single largest expansion of voting rights in United States 

history; 

Whereas the ratification of the 19th Amendment did not, in 

practice, guarantee voting rights to all American women, 

as African-American women, Native American women, 

Asian American women, Hispanic American women, and 

other women of color in America continued to face legal 

and social barriers to voting throughout the twentieth 

century; 
2 

•HRES 1046 EH 

Whereas the suffragists persevered in their quest for women’s 

equality through generations of hardships, including the 

Civil War, Reconstruction, World War I, and the Spanish 

Flu pandemic; and 

Whereas the Women’s Suffrage Centennial Commission was 

created to encourage, plan, develop, and execute programs, projects, and activities to commemorate the centennial of the passage and ratification of the 19th 

Amendment: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) supports the designation of National Women’s 

Suffrage Month; 

(2) celebrates the 100th anniversary of the passage 

and ratification of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution; 

(3) honors the fearless voting rights activists who 

fought for generations to secure women’s access to the 

ballot; 

(4) reaffirms that all citizens have the right to full 

participation in American democracy; 

(5) recommits to uplifting an inclusive, diverse, and 

complete history of women’s fight for the vote; 

(6) recommits to persevering through these unexpected times to celebrate the suffragists, educate new 

generations about this critical chapter in the history of 

American democracy, and create a legacy that will inspire for the next 100 years; 
3 

•HRES 1046 EH 

(7) recommends that Members of Congress demonstrate their support for the suffrage centennial 

through local and national commemorative efforts, such 

as the Women’s Suffrage Centennial Commission’s Forward Into Light Campaign; and 

(8) encourages the people of the United States to 

observe National Women’s Suffrage Month and commemorate this milestone of American democracy by ensuring that the untold stories of women’s decades-long 

battle for the ballot are recognized and celebrated across 

the United States. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
No. 12-5050.

#### Borbon *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
```

                                                                                        EXHIBIT 32.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of The St. Lawrence Seaway  Corporation (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the year ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the
date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Daniel L. Nir,  President  and  Treasurer of the Company,  certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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

/s/ Daniel L. Nir
----------------------------------
Daniel L. Nir
President and Treasurer
June 29, 2004
```

----
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 14134]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7426]

[[Page 14134]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP97-291-000]

Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company; Notice of Proposed Changes 
in FERC Gas Tariff

March 19, 1997.
    Take notice that on March 14, 1997, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line 
Company (Panhandle) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
First Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, proposed to be 
effective April 13, 1997.

Fourth Revised Sheet No. 242
Fourth Revised Sheet No. 243
Fourth Revised Sheet No. 244

    Panhandle states that the revised tariff sheets modify Section 8.9 
of the General Terms and Conditions to provide for scheduling of firm 
secondary points of receipt and delivery based upon the highest 
percentage of the maximum rate.
    Panhandle states that copies of this filing are being served on all 
jurisdictional customers and applicable state regulatory agencies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-7426 Filed 3-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           9
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                  3,471
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                  595
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                        7,364
<TRADING-ASSETS>                        0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>             30,582
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                  2,372
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                    2,384
<LOANS>                                 60,121
<ALLOWANCE>                             571 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          111,881
<DEPOSITS>                              99,346
<SHORT-TERM>                            0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                     805
<LONG-TERM>                             171
<COMMON>                                252
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<OTHER-SE>                              11,220
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>          111,881
<INTEREST-LOAN>                         2,693
<INTEREST-INVEST>                       932
<INTEREST-OTHER>                        152
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                        3,777
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                      1,996
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      2,002
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                   1,776
<LOAN-LOSSES>                           291
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                      144
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                         1,344
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         469
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>              325
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                            325 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           0.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0.81
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                          3.99
<LOANS-NON>                             49
<LOANS-PAST>                            22
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                        0  
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                         0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                        426
<CHARGE-OFFS>                           164
<RECOVERIES>                            18
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                       571
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                    571
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                     0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                 0
        

</TABLE>
DISMISS and Opinion Filed August 30, 2021 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-00699-CR 

No. 05-21-00700-CR 

LINDSEY KINSER, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause Nos. F19-25055-X & F18-41626-X 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Molberg, Goldstein, and Smith 

Opinion by Justice Smith 

On August 16, 2021, Lindsey Kinser’s notices of appeals were filed in the 

above appeals. According to the notices, appellant sought to appeal the trial court’s 

July 20, 2021 order continuing appellant on probation in each case. Several other 

documents were filed along with the notices, including the trial court’s August 4, 

2021 order granting appellant’s motion to withdraw her appeals and August 4, 2021 

judgments adjudicating guilt in each case. 

As a general rule, an appellate court may consider appeals by criminal 

defendants only after conviction. Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—

Dallas 1998, no pet.). With regards to deferred adjudication, the Legislature has 
 –2– 

authorized appeal of only two types of orders: (1) an order granting deferred 

adjudication, and (2) an order imposing punishment pursuant to an adjudication of 

guilt. Davis v. State, 195 S.W.3d 708, 711 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Orders 

modifying the terms or conditions of deferred adjudication are not themselves 

appealable. Id. Because appellant’s notices of appeal challenge the trial court’s July 

20, 2021 orders continuing her on probation, we lack jurisdiction over the appeals. 

To the extent the trial court signed an order granting appellant’s motion to 

withdraw her appeals, we note that the rules of appellate procedure provide that “[a]t 

any time before the appellate court’s decision, the appellate court may dismiss the 

appeal upon the appellant’s motion.” TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a) (emphasis added). In 

other words, the trial court lacked authority to dismiss our appeals. 

We dismiss these appeals. 

Do Not Publish 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 

210699F.U05 

 

/Craig Smith/

CRAIG SMITH 

JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

LINDSEY KINSER, Appellant 

No. 05-21-00699-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the Criminal District 

Court No. 6, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F19-25055-X. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Smith. 

Justices Molberg and Goldstein 

participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal. 

Judgment entered August 30, 2021 

 
 –4– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

LINDSEY KINSER, Appellant 

No. 05-21-00700-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the Criminal District 

Court No. 6, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F18-41626-X. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Smith. 

Justices Molberg and Goldstein 

participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal. 

Judgment entered August 30, 2021
Certification of Chief Financial Officer



 Exhibit 10.(a).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

  
 In connection with the Annual Report of chinadotcom
corporation (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Form 20-F”), I, Daniel Widdicombe, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 
  

	(1)	 	The Form 20-F 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 Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

  
 Date: June 16, 2003 
  

	/s/ Daniel Widdicombe     
	

	Daniel Widdicombe
	Chief Financial Officer


  
  
  
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to chinadotcom corporation and will be retained by
chinadotcom corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Argued and submitted June 15,

affirmed July 19,

petition for review denied December 14, 2017 (361 Or 281)

#### Anatoliy SHABAN, *Plaintiff-Appellant, v.*STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, an Illinois corporation, *Defendant-Respondent.*

Multnomah County Circuit Court

15CV21724; A161967

398 P3d 507

Willard E. Merkel argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs was Merkel & Associates.

Janis C. Puracal argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Anthony L. Reiner and Maloney Lauersdorf Reiner PC.

Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Garrett, Judge, and Haselton, Senior Judge.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed. *McBride v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.,*282 Or App 675, 386 P3d 679 (2016).
[ARTICLE] 5
<TABLE>
<S>                             <C>
[PERIOD-TYPE]                   9-MOS
[FISCAL-YEAR-END]                          APR-30-2000
[PERIOD-END]                               JAN-31-2000
[CASH]                                               3
[SECURITIES]                                         0
[RECEIVABLES]                                        0
[ALLOWANCES]                                         0
[INVENTORY]                                          0
[CURRENT-ASSETS]                                     3
[PP&E]                                               0
[DEPRECIATION]                                       0
[TOTAL-ASSETS]                                       3
[CURRENT-LIABILITIES]                                0
[BONDS]                                              0
[PREFERRED-MANDATORY]                                0
[PREFERRED]                                          0
[COMMON]                                           168
[OTHER-SE]                                       (165)
[TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY]                         3
[SALES]                                              0
[TOTAL-REVENUES]                                     0
[CGS]                                                0
[TOTAL-COSTS]                                        0
[OTHER-EXPENSES]                                     0
[LOSS-PROVISION]                                     0
[INTEREST-EXPENSE]                                   0
[INCOME-PRETAX]                                      0
[INCOME-TAX]                                         0
[INCOME-CONTINUING]                                  0
[DISCONTINUED]                                       0
[EXTRAORDINARY]                                      0
[CHANGES]                                            0
[NET-INCOME]                                         0
[EPS-BASIC]                                        0
[EPS-DILUTED]                                        0
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 64 (Thursday, April 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 15896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8493]


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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Dkt. C-3707]


Universal Merchants, Inc., et al.; Prohibited Trade Practices, 
and Affirmative Corrective Actions

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Consent order.

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

SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged violations of federal law prohibiting 
unfair or deceptive acts or practices and unfair methods of 
competition, this consent order prohibits, among other things, a 
California-based dietary supplement manufacturer and its president from 
claiming, without competent and reliable scientific substantiation, 
that any food, dietary supplement or drug reduces body fat, causes 
weight loss, increase lean body mass, or controls appetite or craving 
for sugar; from misrepresenting the results of any test, study or 
research; and from representing that any testimonial or endorsement is 
the typical experience of users of the advertised product, unless the 
claim is substantiated or the respondent discloses the generally 
expected results clearly and prominently.

DATES: Complaint and Order issued January 23, 1997.\1\

    \1\ Copies of the Complaint and the Decision and Order are 
available from the Commission's Public Reference Branch, H-130, 6th 
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Cleland, FTC/H-466, Washington, DC 20580. (202) 326-3088.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Friday, November 15, 1996, there was 
published in the Federal Register, 61 FR 58563, a proposed consent 
agreement with analysis In the Matter of Universal Merchants, Inc., et 
al., for the purpose of soliciting public comment. Interested parties 
were given sixty (60) days in which to submit comments, suggestions or 
objections regarding the proposed form of the order.
    No comments having been received, the Commission has ordered the 
issuance of the complaint in the form contemplated by the agreement, 
made its jurisdictional findings and entered an order to cease and 
desist, as set forth in the proposed consent agreement, in disposition 
of this proceeding.

(Sec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U.S.C. 46. Interprets or applies sec. 5, 
38 Stat. 719, as amended; 15 U.S.C. 45, 52)
Benjamin I. Berman,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-8493 Filed 4-2-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
1 Tex. R. A pp. P. 47.2(a). NO. 07-03-0161 -CR IN THE COU RT OF APP EALS FOR THE SEVENT H DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMA RILLO PANE L D APRIL 24, 2003

______________________________ TIMOTHY LAW RENCE MOORE, APPELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________ FROM THE 25 1ST DISTR ICT COURT OF POTT ER COUNTY; NO. 44,846-C; H ONORAB LE PATR ICK A. PIRTLE, J UDGE

_______________________________ Before QUINN and REAVIS and CAMPB ELL, JJ. MEM ORAN DUM OP INI ON 1 Pursuant to a prose notice of appeal express ing a desire to appeal from a charge of robbery , this C ourt

assigned the above-referenced ca use num ber. Appellantalso filed2

notices of

ap pe al fr om c onv ic tions for burglary of a habitation in cause num ber 07-03- 0129-CR and for aggravated robbery in causenum ber 07- 03- 013 0-C R, w hich app eals wereabated and the causes reman ded to the trial court for further proceedings. However, byhis docketing statem ent in this appeal, appe llant i ndicates the robbery charge w as dropped. Rule 27.1(b) of the Texa s Rules of App ellate Procedure provides tha t a notice of appeal i s ineffecti ve if fil ed before the tr ial cou rt makes a finding of guilt orreceives a jury verdict. Thus, there being no finding of guilt on the charge of robbery, t he notice of appeal is ineffective to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, the purported appeal is dism issed for want of jurisdiction. Don H. Rea vis Justice