alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
##### 



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
 Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 February 23, 2006
 Date
of Report (Date of earliest event reported)
 CARDIAC SCIENCE CORPORATION
  Delaware
    
    000-51512
    
    94-3300396(State or Other Jurisdiction
of Incorporation)
    
    (Commission File No.)
    
    (IRS Employer
Identification No.)
 3303 Monte Villa Parkway, Bothell, Washington
    
    98021(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (425) 402-2000
  o
    
    Written communication pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
 o
    
    Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)
 o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))
 o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))




---



##### 



Item 2.02 Results of Operations and Financial Condition.
   Item 9.01 Financial Statement and Exhibits.
 (d) Exhibits
 99.1
    
    Earnings release of Cardiac Science Corporation dated February 23, 2006.




---



##### 



SIGNATURE
  CARDIAC SCIENCE CORPORATIONBy:
    /s/ Michael K. MatysikMichael K. MatysikSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer




---



##### 



Exhibit Index
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description99.1
    
    Earnings release of Cardiac Science Corporation dated February 23, 2006.
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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 April 12, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40603 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus CALIXTO SILVA-ESPINOZA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:04–CR-2089-1

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Calixto Silva-Espinoza (Silva) appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry following deportation. Silva argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Silva’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Silva contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectlyNo. 05-40603 -2- decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi , we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Silva properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. The judgment of the district court is thus AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION
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

In connection with the
Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB of Healthbridge, Inc. (Registrant) for the
quarterly
period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the
date hereof (Report), I, Nora Coccaro, chief executive officer and
chief
financial officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant
to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:

(1)    
          This Report complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in
this
          Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial
condition of
          Registrant at the end of the period covered by this Report and results
of operations of Registrant for
the period covered by this Report.

| | 
| | 

/s/ Nora Coccaro
Nora Coccaro

Chief Executive
Officer
and Chief Financial Officer September 16, 2005

This certification
accompanies this
Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
except to
the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by
Registrant for
the purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
This
certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
(whether made
before or after the date of this Report), irrespective of any general
incorporation
language contained in such filing.

A signed original of this
written
statement required by §906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be
retained
by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff
upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 840 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 840

    To improve services for victims of sexual assault and domestic 
                               violence.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 26, 2013

Mr. Sablan (for himself, Mrs. Christensen, Ms. Bordallo, and Ms. Moore) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To improve services for victims of sexual assault and domestic 
                               violence.

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

SECTION 1. SEXUAL ASSAULT SERVICES GRANTS.

    (a) Amendment.--Paragraph (4) of section 14601(b) of the Violence 
Against Women Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14043g(b)) is amended--
            (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``, except that the 
        United States Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the 
        District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the 
        Northern Mariana Islands shall each be allocated 0.125 percent 
        of the total appropriations''; and
            (2) by striking the third sentence.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to grants under section 14601 of the Violence 
Against Women Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14043g) for fiscal year 2013 and 
succeeding fiscal years.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 21
----------


                     LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
                     --------------------


     Name of Company                         Where Organized
     ---------------                         ---------------

1.   AMF Energy, Inc.                        Delaware
2.   AMF Foods, LLC                          Delaware
3.   AMF Merchandising Corporation           Delaware
4.   KLC Land Company, LLC                   Hawaii
5.   D/C Distribution Corporation            California
6.   EC Managers, Inc.                       Delaware
7.   Kaanapali Development Corp.             Hawaii
8.   Kaanapali Estate Coffee, Inc.           Hawaii
9.   KDCW, Inc.                              Delaware
10.  Kekaha Sugar Company, Limited           Hawaii
11.  KLC Holding Corp.                       Delaware
12.  LPC Corporation                         Hawaii
13.  NB Lot 2, LLC                           Delaware
14.  NB Lot 3, LLC                           Delaware
15.  NB Lot 4, LLC                           Delaware
16.  Oahu Distribution, Inc.                 Hawaii
17.  Oahu MS Development Corp.               Hawaii
18.  Oahu Sugar Company, LLC                 Hawaii
19.  Pioneer Mill Company, Limited           Hawaii
20.  Puna Sugar Company, Limited             Hawaii
21.  Waikele Golf Manager, LLC               Delaware
22.  Waikele Golf, LLC                       Delaware
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United State Code, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as
Chief Financial Officer of CNB Financial Services, Inc. (the "Company"), does
hereby certify that:

     (1)  The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March
          31, 2008 (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirement of
          section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Act of 1934; and

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


                                        /s/ Rebecca S. Stotler
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Rebecca S. Stotler
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        May 14, 2008


                                       53
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.1

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

      Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United State Code, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of CNB Financial Services, Inc. (the
"Company"), does hereby certify that:

      (1)   The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
            September 30, 2003 (the "Report"), fully complies with the
            requirement of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Act of 1934;
            and

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

                                         /s/  Thomas F. Rokisky
                                         ----------------------
                                         Thomas F. Rokisky
                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                         November 13, 2003
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**[For Series 2005-1 and 2005-3]**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Vishal Gulati, Principal Financial Officer of RFS Holding, L.L.C., certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of GE Capital Credit Card Master Note Trust;

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;

 

4.             Based upon my knowledge and upon the annual compliance statement included in the report and required to be delivered to the trustee in accordance with the terms of the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement; and except as disclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement; and

 

5.             The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the servicer’s compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, that is included in these reports.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas and BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware.

 

March 28, 2011

 
|   | /s/ Vishal Gulati |
|--------|-------------------|
|   | Name:             | Vishal Gulati |
|   | Title:            | Principal Financial   Officer, and as the senior officer in charge of securitization for the   depositor |

 

----
Javaris Devaughn HERRING, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-3420

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

November 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Samatrea MONTS, Appellant, v. REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION and Riverside Presbyterian Apartments, Inc., Appellees.

No. 1D17-2169

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

November 7, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 102194-102195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29819]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service

[[Page 102195]]

Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products 
List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 17, 2024.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 5, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 895 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-621, K2025-620.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-29819 Filed 12-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 767 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 767

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 16, 2013

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to modify the Pilot Project 
       offices of the Federal Permit Streamlining Pilot Project.

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

SECTION 1. PILOT PROJECT OFFICES OF FEDERAL PERMIT STREAMLINING PILOT 
              PROJECT.

    Section 365 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15924) is 
amended by striking subsection (d) and inserting the following:
    ``(d) Pilot Project Offices.--The following Bureau of Land 
Management Offices shall serve as the Pilot Project offices:
            ``(1) Rawlins Field Office, Wyoming.
            ``(2) High Plains District Office, Wyoming.
            ``(3) Montana/Dakotas State Office, Montana.
            ``(4) Farmington Field Office, New Mexico.
            ``(5) Carlsbad Field Office, New Mexico.
            ``(6) Grand Junction/Glenwood Springs Field Office, 
        Colorado.
            ``(7) Vernal Field Office, Utah.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 15, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

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

I, Nicholas Ferris, Chief Executive Officer of J-Pacific Gold Inc.(the "Company") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:
1. This Amended Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2006, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "report"), fully complies withthe 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, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company. 
Date: Oct 2, 2007
/s/ Nicholas Ferris Chief Executive OfficerJ-Pacific Gold Inc.
Steven PARMLEY, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-994

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed August 22, 2018

Steven Parmley, pro se.

Alicia Victoria Gonzalez, Tampa, for Appellee.

ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, Judge.

After an evidentiary hearing, a hearing officer appointed by the Department of Children and Families (DCF) Office of Appeal Hearings denied Steven Parmley's administrative appeal of DCF's purported failure to act on his request for food assistance program benefits. *See* §§ 120.80(7), 409.285(1), Fla. Stat. (2017) ; Fla. Admin. Code. R. 65-2.042 - .069. Parmley now appeals DCF's final administrative decision. Specifically, he challenges the hearing officer's written, nonfinal order-which she had entered before the evidentiary hearing-denying his motion to disqualify her from further participation in the proceeding.

Upon de novo review, *see**Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Broward County*, 810 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) ; *see also* Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(h), 9.190(a), we agree with Parmley's argument that the hearing officer erred by not merely evaluating the legal sufficiency of the motion but by also disputing his factual allegations in her written order, thereby placing herself in an adversarial position with him before the hearing at which she would be required to resolve disputed issues of material fact, *see* Fla. Admin. Code. R. 65-2.056, .057, .060(1), .066 ; *Lee Mem'l Health Sys. v. Agency for Health Care Admin.*, 910 So.2d 892, 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (citing *Bundy v. Rudd*, 366 So.2d 440, 442 (Fla. 1978) ); *World Transp., Inc. v. Cent. Fla. Reg'l Transp.*, 641 So.2d 913, 914 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (explaining that the hearing officer's attempt to refute the movant's factual allegations in support of its claim of partiality constituted additional grounds *595for disqualification); *see also**Cherry Commc'ns, Inc. v. Deason*, 652 So.2d 803, 804 (Fla. 1995) ("[W]e have held that the 'administrative context does not and need not match the judicial model,' but that an ' "impartial decision-maker is a basic constituent of minimum due process." ' " (quoting *Ridgewood Props., Inc. v. Dep't of Cmty. Affairs*, 562 So.2d 322, 323 (Fla. 1990) ) ). Therefore, we reverse the final administrative decision and remand for a new hearing for which DCF's Office of Appeal Hearings shall appoint a new hearing officer.

Reversed; remanded with directions.

CRENSHAW, J., and GENTILE, GEOFFREY H., ASSOCIATE JUDGE, Concur.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAY GEROW, an individual and ZDI

GAMING, INC, a Washington

corporation,

 Plaintiffs - Appellants,

 v.

STATE OF WASHINGTON; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 08-35885

D.C. No. 3:08-cv-05087-BHS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 10, 2010** 

Seattle, Washington

Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

FILED

JUN 14 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-2-

The district court did not err in granting the defendants’ motion for judgment

on the pleadings, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c), because the individual defendants are

entitled to legislative immunity from suit. Here, under the four factors stated in

Kaahumanu v. County of Maui, 315 F.3d 1215, 1220 (9th Cir. 2003), we conclude

that the rulemaking at issue is legislative in character. First, the regulations are a

formulation of the Washington Gambling Commission’s policy because they are

rules that apply regardless of the circumstances of particular cases rather than being

ad hoc. See id. Second, the regulations, by their very terms, apply to the public at

large. See id. at 1222. Third, the Commission members voted on the regulations,

rendering them formally legislative. See id. at 1223. Fourth, the regulations bear

the hallmarks of traditional legislation because they have prospective implications. 

See id.

Because this type of rulemaking is a legislative action, the defendant

Commissioners, including Prentice, have absolute immunity for their actions

associated with the passage of the rules. See Bogan v. Scott-Harris, 523 U.S. 44, 52

(1998). The immunity also extends to Gambling Commission Director Day for his

actions because they “were integral steps in the legislative process.” Id. at 55. The

alleged statements made by Prentice and Day cannot be the basis of liability: ZDI

does not allege that these statements caused it independent harm, but rather that
-3-

they are evidence of the Commission’s retaliatory animus. However, “[t]he claim

of an unworthy purpose does not destroy the privilege” of legislative immunity. 

Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U.S. 367, 377 (1951).

After dismissing all federal claims, the district court did not abuse its

discretion in dismissing ZDI’s related state law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). 

Because a district court may not consider materials outside the pleadings in

adjudicating a Rule 12(c) motion, see Fleming v. Pickard, 581 F.3d 922, 925 & n.4

(9th Cir. 2009), the district court did not abuse its discretion in striking ZDI’s

supplemental materials. Defendants’ motion to strike ZDI’s reply brief is denied as

moot.

AFFIRMED.