alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 105 (Thursday, June 1, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 28613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-13313]



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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Item Submitted for OMB Review

    The Federal Maritime Commission hereby gives notice that the 
following item has been submitted to OMB for review pursuant to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). Requests for 
information, including copies of the collection of information and 
supporting documentation, should be directed to Bruce A. Dombrowski, 
Deputy Managing Director, Federal Maritime Commission, 800 North 
Capitol Street, NW., Room 1082, Washington, DC 20573, telephone number 
(202) 523-5800. Comments may be submitted to the agency and to the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal 
Maritime Commission, within 15 days after the date of the Federal 
Register in which this notice appears.

Summary of Item Submitted for OMB Review

46 CFR Part 582
    FMC requests an extension of clearance for 46 CFR part 582, which 
implements section 10(b)(2) of the Shipping Act of 1984 provisions. The 
Act provides that no common carrier by water may rebate, refund, or 
remit any portion of its rates except in accordance with its tariffs or 
service contracts. Section 15(b) of the Act requires the chief 
executive officer of each common carrier and certain other persons 
designated by the Commission to file a periodic written certification 
that anti-rebating policies have been implemented. The Commission 
estimates that approximately 2100 NVOCCs, 500 VOCCs and 1800 freight 
forwarders will file anti-rebate certifications on each even-numbered 
year. Annual respondent burden for complying with the regulation is 
2,200 manhours (\1/2\ hour per response). Estimated annual cost to the 
Federal Government is $5,700; estimated annual cost to respondents is 
$59,400.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-13313 Filed 5-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.1
 WRITTEN STATEMENT
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  (i)
    
    the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2011 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
 Dated: May 10, 2011
    /s/ Henri CourpronHENRI COURPRONDated: May 10, 2011
    /s/ Frederick S. CromerFREDERICK S. CROMER -63-
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CAUSE NO. 2:15-CR-70 

)

BRUCANDO FORD, II, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Findings and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge Upon a Plea of Guilty (DE

#19), filed on September 28, 2015. No objections have been filed

to Magistrate Judge Rodovich’s findings and recommendations upon a

plea of guilty. Accordingly, the Court now ADOPTS those findings

and recommendations, ACCEPTS the guilty plea of Defendant Brucando

Ford, and FINDS the Defendant guilty of Count 1 of the Indictment,

in violation of Title 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). 

DATED: October 22, 2015 /s/RUDY LOZANO, Judge

United States District Court
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1485 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1485

                  For the relief of Alzoubi Muhammed.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 5, 2005

Mr. Davis of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                  For the relief of Alzoubi Muhammed.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR ALZOUBI MUHAMMED.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Alzoubi Muhammed shall be 
eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 
to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 
filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 
204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Alzoubi Muhammed enters the United 
States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), he shall 
be considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if 
otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Alzoubi Muhammed, the 
Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, 
during the current or next following fiscal year, the total number of 
immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas 
that are made available to natives of the country of the alien's birth 
under section 202(e) of such Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Alzoubi 
Muhammed shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any 
right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### HOFACKER, Respondent, v. HOFACKER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, *1131Second Department.

October 18, 1907.)

Action by Gottfried Hofacker against Vietorine Hofaeker.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed by default, with costs.
#### In the Matter of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Respondent, v German Bermudez, Appellant.

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration, the appeal is from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hyman, J.), dated October 24, 1983, which, after a hearing, granted the application.

Order and judgment affirmed, with costs.

We find that the police accident report was properly received into evidence under the business record exception to the hearsay rule *(see,*CPLR 4518 [a]; *Zaulich v Thompkins Sq. Holding Co.,*10 AD2d 492; *Toll v State of New York,*32 AD2d 47). Moreover, appellant’s statement in this report, describing how the accident occurred, was available for use by the petitioner as evidence-in-chief in establishing that there had been no contact between appellant’s vehicle and a “hit-and-run” vehicle, since the statement qualified as an admission *(see, Penn v Kirsh,*40 AD2d 814; *859
      *Flynn v Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth.,*94 AD2d 617, *affd*61 NY2d 769; *Shea v Johnson,*101 AD2d 1018). Special Term’s finding that there had been no contact between the vehicles was therefore amply supported by the evidence presented *{see, Matter of State Farm Ins. Co. v Jackson,*106 AD2d 508).

Lastly, Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s application for a continuance of the hearing *{see, Bilyou v State of New York,*33 AD2d 604; *Spodek v Lasser Stables,*89 AD2d 892). Appellant risked the possibility that he would be unavailable to testify by leaving the jurisdiction for a prolonged period of time when he knew or should have known that his case would be called for a hearing. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein and Niehoff, JJ., concur.
**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**








We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements (Nos.
      333-139277, 333-134726 and 333-125210) on Form S-8 of InfoSearch Media, Inc.
      of
      our report dated April 17, 2007, relating to our audit of the consolidated
      financial statements, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of
      InfoSearch Media, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006.








/s/
      Singer Lewak Greenbaum & Goldstein LLP


SINGER
      LEWAK GREENBAUM & GOLDSTEIN LLP





Los
      Angeles, California


April
      17,
      2007
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Matthew SANDERS, Appellant.

No. 03-3579.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted May 7, 2004.

Decided May 18, 2004.

Stephanie M. Rose, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Cedar Rapids, IA, Charles William Larson, Sr., U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Sioux City, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Matthew Sanders, Pekin, IL, pro se.

Before BYE, MCMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

*442PER CURIAM.

Matthew Sanders appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court1 for the Northern District of Iowa upon revocation of his supervised release. The district court sentenced Sanders to 12 months imprisonment followed by continuation of his supervised release until its original expiration date. For reversal, Sanders argues that the district court abused its discretion in revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to 12 months imprisonment. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

In June 2002, Sanders pleaded guilty to bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), and was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised release. Sanders commenced supervised release in January 2003. In September 2003, the government petitioned for revocation based on Sanders’s problematic behavior at community-treatment facilities, unauthorized travel out of the judicial district, marijuana use, multiple failures to report for drug testing and to provide timely monthly reports to his parole officer, and attempt to buy gas by writing a check without having sufficient funds to cover the purchase — all of which Sanders • admitted.

We reject Sanders’s arguments on appeal. The revocation of supervised release was not an abuse of discretion, because Sanders admitted that he had used marijuana and had failed to report for drug testing. *See*18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), (g); *United States v. Shaw,*180 F.3d 920, 923 (8th Cir.1999) (per curiam) (standard of review). The length of Sanders’s sentence was also not an abuse of discretion, because although the 12-month prison term exceeded the Guidelines recommendation under U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a), the policy statements in Chapter 7 of the Guidelines are not binding on the district court. *See United States v. Holmes,*283 F.3d 966, 968 (8th Cir.2002); *United States v. Brown,*203 F.3d 557, 558 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam). Furthermore, his sentence does not exceed the 2-year statutory maximum revocation prison term for Class C felonies under § 3583(e)(3), *see*18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) (20-year maximum for bank robbery), 3559(a)(3); and the court both considered the § 3553(a) factors and explained its sentencing decision, *see*18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3).

Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny Sanders’s motion for new counsel, and note any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel that Sanders intended to raise is not properly before us. *See United States v. Martin,*59 F.3d 767, 771 (8th Cir.1995). Finally, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




I,
      Zong
      Yun Zhou, 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
      SORL AUTO PARTS, INC. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 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 Quarterly
      Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial
      condition and results of operations of SORL AUTO PARTS, INC.




Dated:
                August 10, 2007/s/
                Zong Yun ZhouZong
                Yun ZhouChief
                Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 3

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                       RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                               PHARMOS CORPORATION
                              A Nevada Corporation

The undersigned hereby certify as follows:

      1. That they are the President and Secretary of Pharmos Corporation, a
Nevada Corporation (the "Corporation");

      2. That the original Articles of Incorporation of the Corporation were
filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of Nevada on the 20th
day of December, 1982;

      3. That the Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Corporation were
filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of Nevada on the 29th
day of October, 1992;

      4. That capital has been paid to the Corporation, and stock of the
Corporation has been issued;

      5. That at a meeting of the Corporation's Board of Directors (the "Board")
held on March 5, 2002, the Board unanimously consented to and approved an
amendment (the "Amendment") to the first paragraph of Article FOURTH of the
Corporation's Restated Articles of Incorporation to increase the Corporation's
authorized capital stock to one hundred ten million (110,000,000) shares of
Common Stock.

      6. That at a meeting of the Corporation's stockholders held on July 11,
2002, the Corporation's stockholders voted for the Amendment, and that,
therefore, the first paragraph of Article FOURTH of the Corporation's Restated
Articles of Incorporation is amended to read as follows:

            "The total number of shares of stock which the corporation shall
have authority to issue is one hundred eleven million two hundred fifty thousand
(111,250,000), of which stock one hundred ten million (110,000,000) shares of
the par value of three cents ($0.03) each, amounting in the aggregate to Three
Million Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($3,300,000), shall be Common Stock, and
of which one million two hundred fifty thousand (1,250,000) shares of the par
value of three cents ($0.03) each, amounting in the aggregate to Thirty-Seven
Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($37,500), shall be Preferred Stock."


                                       17
<PAGE>

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Certificate of
Amendment of Restated Articles of Incorporation on this 12th day of July, 2002.


                                                           /s/ GAD RIESENFELD
                                                           Gad Riesenfeld
                                                           President


                                                           /s/ ROBERT W. COOK
                                                           ------------------
                                                           Robert W. Cook
                                                           Secretary


                                       18
Exhibit (31)(2)



Certification

I, Thomas Kilbourne, certify that:



(1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Daybreak Mines, Inc. Company.



(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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4) I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

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

(b) Not required;

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

(5) I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



Date:  June 14, 2005



By /s/  THOMAS KILBOURNE

Thomas Kilbourne, Principal Accounting Officer
Exhibit
        32.2
 
 **SECTION
        906 CERTIFICATION**
 
 
 I,
        Dennis
        M. McGrath, Chief Financial Officer of PhotoMedex, Inc., a Delaware corporation
        (the "Company"), do hereby certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
        1350,
        as created pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
        that:
 
 (1)
        the
        accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
        ended
        September 30, 2008 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
        Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.
 
  Dated: November
                7, 2008
              By:
              /s/ Dennis
                M.
                McGrathDennis
                    M. McGrath
                  Chief
                    Financial Officer
 
  A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
        Act of 2002 (“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 PhotoMedex, Inc. and will be retained by PhotoMedex, Inc. and
        furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
        request.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28008-28009]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12968]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 28009]]

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Declaration of Disaster Loan Area #2777]


Texas, Declaration of Disaster Loan Area

    Dallas, Parker, and Tarrant Counties and the contiguous counties of 
Collin, Dention, Ellis, Hood, Jack, Johnson, Kaufman, Palo Pinto, 
Rockwall, and Wise in the State of Texas constitute a disaster area as 
a result of damages caused by severe storms and flooding which occurred 
on May 5-8, 1995. Applications for loans for physical damage as a 
result of this disaster may be filed until the close of business on 
July 20, 1995 and for economic injury until the close of business on 
February 20, 1996 at the address listed below: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Disaster Area 3 Office, 4400 Amon Carter Blvd., Suit 
102, FT. Worth, TX 76155, or other locally announced locations.
    The interest rates are:

For Physical Damage:
    Homeowners with credit available elsewhere, 8.000%
    Homeowners without credit available elsewhere, 4.000%
    Businesses with credit available elsewhere, 8.000%
    Businesses and non-profit organizations without credit available 
elsewhere 4.000%
    Others (including non-profit organizations) with credit 
available elsewhere, 7.125%
For Economic Injury:
    Businesses and small agricultural cooperatives without credit 
available elsewhere, 4.000%

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 277706 
and for economic injury the number is 852600.

(Catalog of Federal domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 
59008)

    Dated: May 19, 1995.
Philip Lader,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-12968 Filed 5-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-M
#### SWAIM, Appellant, v. FAHEY et al., Respondents.

(bupreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

May 29, 1913.)

Action by Sandford S. Swaim against Thomas Fahey and others. T. Sutro, of New York City, for appellant. W. H. Harding, Jr., of New York City, for respondents.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed. See, also, 140 App. Div. 932, 125 N. Y. Supp. 1146.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

FORT WAYNE DIVISION 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) 

 ) 

 v. ) CASE NO.: 1:15-CR-12-TLS 

 ) 

RANDY P. ROCKHOLT ) 

 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

 This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 41], filed on July 1, 2015. The Defendant has waived objection to the 

Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings and 

Recommendation [ECF No. 41] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition. Subject 

to this Court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 11(c), the plea of guilty to the offense charged in Count 1 of the Indictment is hereby 

accepted, and the Defendant is adjudged guilty of such offense. 

 The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate 

order.

SO ORDERED on July 17, 2015. 

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

 THERESA L. SPRINGMANN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT