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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

# Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement: 

[To Be Published]

# Status: 

Closed meeting.

# Place: 

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

# Date and Time of Previously Announced Meeting: 

Thursday, March 19, 2009 at 2 p.m.

# Change in the Meeting: 

Additional item.

The following item has been added to the Thursday, March 19, 2009 closed meeting agenda:

Formal order of investigation.
      ( print page 11982)    
The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(c)(5), (7) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(5), (7) and (10) permit consideration of the scheduled matter at the closed meeting.

Commissioner Aguilar, as duty officer, determined that Commission business required the above change and that no earlier notice thereof was possible.

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

Dated: March 17, 2009.

Elizabeth M. Murphy,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E9-6192 Filed 3-18-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 12903]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6537]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,463]

Century Land and Timber, Inc.; Greenville, NC; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on March 4, 2009 in response to a petition 
filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Century Land and 
Timber, Inc., Greenville, North Carolina.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of March 2009.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-6537 Filed 3-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5629 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5629

   To provide for the same treatment of all individuals notified of 
    possible qualification for low-income subsidies for purposes of 
   enrollment and the waiver of late enrollment penalties under the 
                        Medicare part D program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 15, 2006

  Mr. Wexler introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for the same treatment of all individuals notified of 
    possible qualification for low-income subsidies for purposes of 
   enrollment and the waiver of late enrollment penalties under the 
                        Medicare part D program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Part D Deadline Equality 
Act of 2006''.

SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF SAME MEDICARE PART D SPECIAL ENROLLMENT AND 
              WAIVER OF LATE ENROLLMENT PENALTY RULES FOR ALL 
              INDIVIDUALS NOTIFIED OF POSSIBLE QUALIFICATION FOR LOW-
              INCOME SUBSIDIES.

    (a) In General.--Any special enrollment period for 2006 established 
under section 1860D-1(b)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395w-101(b)(3)) for subsidy-eligible individuals, and any waiver of a 
late enrollment penalty applicable to such individuals, shall apply to 
all notified part D eligible individuals without regard to whether or 
not they are subsidy-eligible individuals.
    (b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
            (1) Notified part d eligible individual.--The term 
        ``notified part D eligible individual'' means a part D eligible 
        individual (as defined in section 1860D-1(a)(3)(A) of the 
        Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-101(a)(3)(A)) who is 
        notified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services after 
        May 15, 2006, but before November 15, 2006, that the individual 
        may qualify for a low-income subsidy under section 1860D-14(a) 
        of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)).
            (2) Subsidy-eligible individual.--The term ``subsidy-
        eligible individual'' means a part D eligible individual (as so 
        defined) who is determined to be a subsidy-eligible individual 
        (as defined in section 1860D-14(a)(3) of the Social Security 
        Act, 42 U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)(3)).
                                 <all>
```
### 9/30/2008 Page 1of2

POSTFOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT This case revised based on 9/23/2008 Post-FOCUS Draft Revision l#2 ofInitial Review Engineering Report. Case Number: P080292 Assessor: Flessner

Scenario#: Number ofRelease Sites: Release Activity: Jelease Description:

. WATER LANDFILL INClINER LAND/INCIN FUGITIVE Total Releases: (kglyr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kglyr) 

## Release Days/yr:I 

# III
Per Site Release: (kg/day) (kg/yr) (kglyr) (kg/yr) (kg/day) Remarks: EAB DROP: Release information for this compound does not meet criteria for preparation ofan exposure assessment in the Exposure Assessment Branch's (EAB) InitialReview Exposure Report (this report).

### 9/30/2008 Page2of 2 POSTFOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT P08-0292
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 1015 9 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

REVEREND JAMES CORNELL CLARK , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:07

- CR

- 27

- 1

Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Reverend James Cornell Clark, federal prisoner # 13238

- 057, filed a n 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion in the district court, seeking a reduction in the 120

- month sentence that was imposed following his conviction for importation of an alien for immoral purposes. The district court denie d the motion, and Clark now appeals. Clark has also moved for leave to amend his appellate brief to include additional requests for relief , and that motion is granted.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 2, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-10159 Document: 00512854609 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/02/2014No. 14

- 10159

Clark argues here, as he did in the district court, that his sentence should
be reduce d because his guidelines sentencing range was increased by enhancements triggered by judicially found facts in violation of Alleyne v. United States , 133 S. Ct. 2151, 2163 (2013). The district court properly denied Clark’s motion because his Alleyne

- based challenge to his sentence is beyond the scope of § 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Hernandez , 645 F.3d 709, 712 (5th Cir. 2011 ); United States v. Whitebird , 55 F.3d 1007, 1011 (5th Cir. 1995).
In addition to his Alleyne

- based sentencing challenge , Clark raises in his appellate brief numerous other challenges to his underlying conviction and sentence, none of which are based on any amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines. Because these other challenges are raised for the first time in Clark’s appe llate brief, we decline to consider them. See United States v.
Pardue , 3 6 F.3d 429, 431 (5th Cir. 1994). The Government moves for the dismissal of Clark’s newly raised arguments, for summary affirmance, and, alternatively, for an extension of time for fi ling an appellate brief. We deny each of those motions and affirm the judgment of the district court denying relief under § 3582(c)(2). AFFIRMED; MOTION TO AMEND APPELLANT’S BRIEF GRANTED;
ALL OTHER OUTSTANDING MOTIONS DENIED.

2 Case: 14-10159 Document: 00512854609 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/02/2014
P.1 

OAR Box 1830 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

165) IV-C-132 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 11/13/2008 7:21:00 AM Sheet 165 of 232 
" p 2 

S

,C

-

r

_. ~° ~ ^ 1<JC-

J

-' -•L :-

,

i U'L'I' b L4JSU I .- , - _ ' ^ T 

I t?H07 8 UNITED STATES ENVIRON MENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

\*«Mfifr / WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

SEP 2 3 1988 

omctoi' 

MA AND RADIATION 

Dr. Betsy Anoker-Johnaon, Vice President 

Environmental Activities Staff 

General Motors Corporation 

General Motors Technical Center 

Warren/ MI 48090-9015 

Dear Dr. Ancker-Johnson: 

I want to briefly respond to your letters of July 15 and 

September 9, 1988 to Administrator Lee Thomas. We agree there 

is reason to be concerned about the level of ozone 

nonattainment in the U.S. AS you know from your telephone 

conversation with Mr. Thomas, we believe that the new 

information on excess vehicle evaporative emissions (including 

running losses) indicates these emissions are very 

significant. We share your sense of urgency in this matter and 

are working hard toward an appropriate resolution. 

I appreciated meeting with your staff on August 16 to 

further discuss GM's concerns. Also, I understand your staff 

met with Office of Mobile Sources' staff on September 16 to 

present your preliminary findings from the evaluation of GM'e 

simplified onboard refueling control system. My staff and I 

look forward to receiving GM's responses to the technical 

questions we asked about the GM system. I would also like to 

reaffirm EPA's request that you provide the GM hardware to our 

Ann Arbor laboratory for some comparison testing with the EPA 

onboard system. 

Thank you for your interest in this area of mutual 

concern. We will continue to keep you and your staff informed 

of our progress. 

Sincerely* 

G&UL^.QaM-* 

j L y Don R. Clay 

•' Acting Assistant Administrator 

for Air and Radiation 

'OOOO'r.x -"r-r.----r.TlON 

cNV,RONMEN,w* 

%}Z\ \ • i '
Exhibit
32.1




Certification
of Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant
to


Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)




In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008 (the “Report”) of Keating Capital, Inc. (the
“Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I, Timothy J. Keating, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant,
hereby certify, to the best of 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, 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
Registrant.










/s/
      Timothy J. KeatingName:
                    Timothy
      J. KeatingDate:
                    March
      9, 2009
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





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 Accelerated Acquisitions IV, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:





The
annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 (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.





Date:
March 30, 2010





/s/ Timothy NeherTimothy
      NeherPrincipal
      Executive OfficerPrincipal
      Financial Officer





A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to ACCELERATED
ACQUISITIONS IV, INC. and will be retained by ACCELERATED ACQUISITIONS IV, INC.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-18-00598-CV

Lease Acceptance Corporation, a Division of Capital Corporation

v.

Luis Ricardo Hernandez

On Appeal from the

444th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2018-DCL-02112-H

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause 

remanded to the trial court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED 

and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. Costs of the appeal 

are adjudged against appellee.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

March 12, 2020
#### Noah Sheets *v.*Bascum Ray, *Justice, etc., et al.*

(No. 7509)

Submitted January 11, 1933.

Decided January 24, 1933.

*Daugherty & Daugherty,*for petitioner.

*Perry & Perry,*for respondents.

Woods, Judge:

Noah Sheets seeks a writ prohibiting Bascum Ray, a justice of the peace of Cabell county, and L. B. Wiley, a constable, from collecting a certain judgment, in the sum of $100.00', rendered against him by said justice in favor of John D. WcColum, on February 13, 1931.

An appeal was awarded petitioner on February 21, 1931, upon the filing of a bond in the penal sum of $200.00, and the transcript, together with said bond, transmitted to the clerk of the common pleas court of Cabell county, some time after June 10, 1931. On the last mentioned date, an act of the legislature (Acts 1931, chapter 35) became effective, by virtue of which the clerk of said court was directed to charge *262and collect certain fees, in advance, from the parties for whom such services were to be rendered — the fee provided in appeals from justices being $5.00, and payable by the appellant. The petitioner has never advanced the fee. Some time prior to May 20, 1932, the clerk returned the papers to the justice. On the 20th of May, 1932, the justice, at the instance of the plaintiff, issued an execution on said judgment, and a second execution on November 10, 1932; hence this proceeding.

Upon the perfecting of the appeal (February 21, 1931) the judgment was vacated, and the justice divested of any further jurisdiction over the case. *Gorrell*v. *Willis,*54 W. Va. 78, 46 S. E. 139; *Watson*v. *Hurry,*47 W. Va. 809, 35 S. E. 830; *Evans*v. *Taylor,*28 W. Va. 184, L. R. A. 1917B, 423n. So, there being nothing before the justice upon which to predicate an execution, the writ prayed for will issue.

Whether the clerk of the common pleas court may require the petitioner hereim to advance the docket fee provided for by chapter 35, Acts 1931, before docketing his appeal, or whether compliance with the aforesaid statute is now a necessary prerequisite to the perfection of an appeal from a justice’s judgment, are questions which do not arise in this proceeding.

*Writ aivarded.*
## State of N ew York Su p reme Cou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: August 7, 2014 105791

________________________________ THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER BRIAN E. DENSMORE, Appellant.

________________________________ Calendar Date: June 5, 2014 Before: Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Rose, Lynch and Devine, JJ.

__________ Andrew Kossover, Public Defender, Kingston (Michael K. Gould of counsel), for appellant. D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Devine, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered December 18, 2012, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of rape in the second degree (four counts). In satisfaction of a 10-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to four counts of rape in the second degree. County Court thereafter sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate prison term of 17 years followed by 15 years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals and we affirm. We reject defendant's contention that he was improperly adjudicated as a second felony offender inasmuch as County Court-2- 105791

was not obligated to expressly advise him that he had the right to challenge the constitutionality of his prior conviction (see People v Wood, 108 AD3d 932, 932-933 [2013]; People v Smith, 121 AD2d 771, 772 [1986]). To the contrary, where defendant was provided with a predicate felony statement, declined to controvert the allegations contained therein and admitted to the prior conviction for criminal mischief in the second degree, we find that the court substantially complied with the dictates of CPL 400.21 (3) and that defendant was properly sentenced as a second felony offender (see People v Wood, 108 AD3d at 933; People v Ellis, 53 AD3d 776, 777 [2008]). Finally, although certain comments by County Court during sentencing could be characterized as intemperate, given the nature of defendant's crimes – unprotected intercourse with four different girls under the age of 15 after befriending them for that express purpose – we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances that would warrant a reduction of his sentence in the interest of justice (see People v Olson, 110 AD3d 1373, 1377 [2013]; People v Beliard, 101 AD3d 1236, 1239 [2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1096 [2013]). Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Rose and Lynch, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
[No. 30326-4-II.

Division Two.

May 25, 2004.]

#### McDonald Excavating, Inc., *Appellant,*v. Riverview Community Bank, et al., *Respondents.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 01-2-05026-9, John P. Wulle, J., entered May 2, 2003. *Reversed*by unpublished opinion per Houghton, J., concurred in by Bridgewater and Armstrong, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL

OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Stephen J. Fanning, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Thermage, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Thermage, Inc.

Date: November 9, 2007



By:

/s/ Stephen J. FanningName:

Stephen J. FanningTitle:

President and Chief Executive Officer


I, Laureen DeBuono, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Thermage, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Thermage, Inc.

Date: November 9, 2007

By:

/s/ Laureen DeBuonoName:

Laureen DeBuonoTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S. C. SECTION 1350



The undersigned hereby certifies that the Form 10-Q Quarterly Report of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Silver Legacy
Capital Corp. (collectively, the Company) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 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 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                         |  |  | 
|------------------------ |  |  | 
|Dated: November 14, 2003 |  |  | 
|                         |  |  |
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 Table Mesa Acquisitions, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 (the "Report"), I, Jay Lutsky, 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 Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  /s/Jay LutskyJay Lutsky, Chief Financial Officer March 10, 2009
#### Mortgage Company of Maryland *v.*Ed Lory *et al.*

(No. 7277)

Submitted May 4, 1932.

Decided June 11, 1932.

*O. B. Bobbitt, R. 8. Cato*and *W. E. B. Byrne,*for appellants.

P. 6r. *Meador, R. W. Bowers,*and *Brown, Jackson <& Knight,*for appellees.

Litz, Judge:

This appeal involves the legal relation to each other of successive liens on abutting property for street improvements in the city of Dunbar.

The trial court ruled that these liens should be given preference in the order of .their dates. Appellants contend that they are of equal dignity and should be paid *pcvri passu*from the proceeds of the property. The charter of the city provides that liens on abutting property for street assessments “shall have priority over all other liens except taxes due the state, and shall be on a parity with taxes and assessments due the city. Such liens, *as a class,*are thus placed on a parity or equality with “taxes and assessments *due*the city.” There is no provision in the charter, however, affecting their legal relation to each other. In *Heller & Company*v. *Duncan,*110 W. Va. 628, 159 S. E. 52, it was held that the rule according precedence to liens in .order of time is, in *476the absence of statutory change, applicable to successive liens of assessments for local improvements. We see no reason for reversing the rule adopted in that case.

The decree of the circuit court is therefore affirmed.

*Affirmed.*