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.                  

###### Postal Service

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

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 16, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

      ( print page 4809)    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on January 8, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1274 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1096, K2025-1095.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00918 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
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 quarterly report of Cygni Investments,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31,
2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned principal executive
officer and principal financial officer of the Company, hereby
certifies 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.


Date:  May 15, 2006

/s/ Carl Suter
Carl Suter, President and Treasurer
(Principal executive officer
and principal financial officer)
Billy Wayne HANBACK v. Cheryl Ann HANBACK

2160337

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

November 3, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

JMG Exploration, Inc.
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of JMG Exploration, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006, I, Herman S. Hartley, President and Chief Executive Officer of, JMG Exploration, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |  | 
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | 
| | 1. | This Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006 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 this Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of JMG Exploration, Inc. for the periods presented therein. |  | 

Date: May 12, 2006

|                                      |  | 
|------------------------------------- |  | 
|                                      |  | 
|/s/ Herman S. Hartley                 |  | 
|                                      |  | 
|Herman S. Hartley                     |  | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  | 
|(Principal Executive Officer)         |  |
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

GUADALUPE P. RAMIREZ, )

ID # 04045493, )

Plaintiff, )

vs. ) No. 3:04-CV-2646-N

)

KATHRYN FLANGIN, )

Defendant. )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and any objections thereto, in

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the

Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings

and Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED June 3, 2005.

 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

 Case 3:04-cv-02646-N Document 10 Filed 06/03/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 26
<Page>

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the use in this Pre-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration
Statement No. 333-105258 of Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company
Separate Account Ten of our report dated March 26, 2003, relating to the
financial statements of Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company, and of
our report dated February 21, 2003, relating to the financial statements of
Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company Separate Account Ten, appearing
in the Statement of Additional Information, which is a part of such
Registration Statement, and to the reference to us under the heading
"Independent Public Accountants" in such Statement of Additional Information.

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Hartford, Connecticut
July 31, 2003
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Royce Wayne Sewell, Appellant

No. 06

- 14

- 00039

- CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 8th District Court of Hopkins County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No.

1323377 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by J ustice Carter, Chief Justice

Morriss and Justice Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of thi s date, we find that the motion of the appellant to

dismiss the appeal should be granted. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We further order that the appellant, Royce Wayne Sewell, pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED APRIL 24, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT
JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
# C_2016462EN.01003401.xml

| 12.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 462/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 462/34

---

Action brought on 10 October 2016 — Repower v EUIPO — repowermap (REPOWER)

(Case T-727/16)

(2016/C 462/44)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Repower AG (Brusio, Switzerland) (represented by: R. Kunz-Hallstein and H. Kunz-Hallstein, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: repowermap.org (Bern, Switzerland)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: International registration of the word mark ‘REPOWER’ designating the European Union — International registration No 1 020 351 designating the European Union

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 August 2016 in Case R 2311/2014-5 (REV)

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 80 of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 80 of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Judy E. Naus, certify that:


1.
        I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Biotel Inc.;


2.
        Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report;


3.
        Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;


4.
        The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:


(a)
        Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;


(b)
        Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and


(c)
        Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely, to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and


5.
        The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):


(a)
        All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and


(d)
        Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.




Date: February 12, 2007
        By:
        /s/ Judy E. NausChief Financial Officer












---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0 573 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. VALERIE SUE DOGTAKINGGUN GRANT,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including April 2 4 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 15 2023

03/15/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0573
Order – Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

EDMUND SAENZ VASQUEZ, 1105529, §

§

v. § Civil Action No. 3:04-CV-2694-L

§ 

DOUGLAS DRETKE, DIRECTOR, §

TDCJ-CID, §

Respondent. §

 ORDER

Before the court is Edmund Saenz Vasquez’s (“Vasquez”) Petition for a Writ of Habeas

Corpus By a Person in State Custody, brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

636(b), and an order of the court in implementation thereof, this action was referred to the United

States magistrate judge for proposed findings and recommendation. On June 7, 2006, the Findings,

Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”) were filed. 

Vasquez, an inmate in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions

Division, was convicted on May 23, 2002, of possession with intent to deliver over 400 grams of

cocaine. He was sentenced to 50 years confinement. He did not appeal his conviction. On January

22, 2004, Vasquez filed a state application for writ of habeas corpus. On October 13, 2004, the

Court of Criminal Appeals denied the application. On December 16, 2004, Vasquez filed his

petition for habeas corpus relief, contending that: (1) he was denied the right to appeal; (2) the

evidence against him was obtained through an illegal search and seizure; and (3) his attorney was

ineffective in failing to object to various issues during sentencing.

The magistrate judge found that Vasquez’s petition for habeas corpus relief was untimely,

as it was filed after the one-year statue of limitations established by the Antiterrorism and Effective

 

 Case 3:04-cv-02694-L Document 16 Filed 09/27/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 80
Order – Page 2

Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). He also determined that Vasquez

failed to show rare and exceptional circumstances that would justify equitable tolling in this case.

The magistrate judge recommends that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with

prejudiced as barred by the one-year limitation period; and that all pending motions be denied. 

Vasquez filed Petitioner’s Objections to the Magistrate’s Findings, Conclusions and

Recommendations (“Objections”) on July 13, 2006. He maintains that his conviction was

unconstitutional and it would be unreasonable to apply the AEDPA provisions against him.

After making an independent review of the pleadings, file and record in this case, the

findings, conclusions and recommendation of the magistrate judge, and the objections thereto, the

court determines that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct. They are

therefore accepted as those of the court. Accordingly, the court overrules Vasquez’s Objections,

denies his Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State Custody, and dismisses this

action with prejudice as time-barred.

It is so ordered this 27th day of September, 2006.

_________________________________

Sam A. Lindsay

United States District Judge

 

 Case 3:04-cv-02694-L Document 16 Filed 09/27/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 81