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.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - [RTID 0648-XB294]

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice; public meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's Spiny Dogfish Advisory Panel will hold a public meeting.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on Thursday, August 19, 2021, from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. For agenda details, see **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held via webinar. Webinar connection information will be available at: *https://www.mafmc.org/​council-events.*

*Council address:* Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674-2331 or on their website at *www.mafmc.org.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 526-5255.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The purpose of the meeting is for the Advisory Panel to create a Fishery Performance Report including advisor input on related specifications and management measures.

## Special Accommodations

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Shelley Kimbel-Spedden at the Council Office, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

(Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801*et seq.*)

Dated: July 30, 2021.

Tracey L. Thompson,

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2021-16648 Filed 8-3-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
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


In connection with the amended quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Franklin
Street Properties Corp. (the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, George J. Carter, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
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 operation
            of the Company.




Dated:  May 3, 2004                       /s/ George J. Carter
                                          ---------------------------
                                          George J. Carter
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       27
Exhibit
        13.2
 
 Credicorp
        Ltd.
 Certification
        Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 (18
        U.S.C. Section 1350)
 
 Pursuant
        to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
        U.S.C.
        Sections 1350(a) and (b)), the undersigned hereby certifies as
        follows:
 
 1.  I
        am the
        Chief Financial and Accounting Officer of Credicorp Ltd. (the
“Company”).
 
 2.  To
        my
        knowledge:
 
 (A)  The
        Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006
        accompanying this Certification, in the form 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
 
 (B)  The
        information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
        financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Dated:
                            July 25, 2007By:/s/
                              WALTER BAYLYName:
                        Walter BaylyTitle:
                              Chief Financial and Accounting
                              Officer
Case: 1:01-cv-07716 Document #: 5 Filed: 09/03/02 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:12
Case: 1:01-cv-07716 Document #: 5 Filed: 09/03/02 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:13
Case: 1:00-cv-07230 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/00 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1
Case: 1:00-cv-07230 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/00 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:2
Case: 1:00-cv-07230 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/00 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:3
Case: 1:00-cv-07230 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/00 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:4
Case: 1:00-cv-07230 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/00 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:5
Case: 1:00-cv-07230 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/16/00 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:6
#### Robert Pharoah HOWARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer T. LARGE; Officer J. Gibson, Defendants-Appellees, and Tracy S. Ray, Chief Warden; Gene M. Johnson, Defendants.

No. 11-6402.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 18, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 2, 2011.

Robert Pharoah Howard, Appellant pro se. Mark R. Davis, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appel-lees.

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Pharoah Howard appeals the district court’s judgment entered after a jury found in favor of Appellees and denied relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record, conclude that the issues Howard raises do not present substantial questions, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Howard’s motion for preparation of the trial transcript at government expense and affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Commodity Protection and Quality Research: Parlier, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Research Units
                        San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center
                                    Crop Diseases, Pests and Genetics Research
                                    Water Management Research
                                    National Arid Land Plant Genetic RepositorySearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Parlier, California San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center Commodity Protection and Quality Research People & Locations





- Home Page
- Contact Information
- News Articles
- Publications
- Research Projects
- Chang-Lin Xiao - Research Leader
- Charles Burks
- Dave Obenland
- Joel Siegel
- Spencer Walse

Charles S Burks

(Chuck)
                     

                     Research Entomologist
                     


                     ARS News Articles
                        item
                                             How to Lure a Pest of Pistachio, Almond and Walnut


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert A. Lynch, Appellant.

[948 NYS2d 841]

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied. Present — Smith, J.P., Fahey, Carni, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.
1 The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United St ates District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 06-3798

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. Leticia Maria Caballero, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: December 7, 2007 Filed: December 13, 2007

___________ Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Leticia Caballero appeals the sentence the district court 1 imposed following her guilty plea to conspiring to distribute 500 gr ams or more of methamphetamine mixture in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and to po ssessing with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine mixture in vi olation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Caballero was sentenced to serve two c oncurrent terms of 120 months in prison (the statutory mandatory minimum) and 5 years of superv ised release. Caballero’s counsel has2 United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005). -2- moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Caballero’s sentence is unreasonable.

Caballero’s sentence is not unreasonable because in these circumstances the district court did not have discretion to impose a sentence below the mandatory minimum sentence. See United States v. Gregg , 451 F.3d 930, 937 (8th Cir. 2006) (rejecting argument that district court had discretion to impose non-Guidelines sentence when portion of sentence is result of mandatory minimum sentence; “Booker 2 does not relate to statutorily-imposedsentences”); United States v. Chacon , 330 F.3d 1065, 1066 (8th Cir. 2003) (only authority for district court to depart from statutory minimum sentence is found in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) and (f), which apply only when government makes motion for substan tial assistance or defendant qualifies for safety-valve relief). After reviewing the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and the judgment is affirmed.

______________________________
G-c. MAW4 

*--au 

OFFICE OF THE All-ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN i)) \ 

iioa. *.A. l&o-l-ieon 

Cri~%inal Dietriot Attorney 

ca?ron, Toxao 


. A erldnal uiatxbt OttOan9~ is xelw 

gat8d to the ~OT~Z&UU net ibPrth-intho a-6' 

qaossdeatlm efibals%a6~24ttheappoirrbPaat 

or say asnistlust - autxlot.attwnoy~~ The 

appa4tutht of ,6nng ass%Ptant axldnal dle~at '& 

attorney poss~ala~tho quallSleatha of.oripioal 

district attorney0 ox oouaty attonmy8 smut.& 

xatlfb& br the 4ionducdaaarn Oowt., ia ‘WC. .. 

to be a wall4 app4twat wBus~theiappci4b2a% . 

of a u a sdsta nt o x imla a44 ltx la t ltttvr a ney et î 

p o snsss4g the p tullflo %tloxa s q tlllhy wa la w or 

a x ia inadtstriot l ~to x neyu o x o a untay tto r mym 

a ust bo gov(lfpIQd by ths pmriedms of atfiolo 

S908,R&.s., as tolloar 

"mranaar s& dlstxicrt, cotulty 

z: 

t oriiaox shall xoqulx6 

5s of alwutle~ ass&tads 

bx olerlcll‘ia the partorrinnoe oi hir 

duths, he sm3.l apply to the Couxhy 

Collluia~onexn' court a$ Iala wuat~ 

tar authority to appoint tioh Uaputiss; 

assistants or olerku, dating by 

swoxn a~pl4atlon th5 nuab6r aode&, 

-the positiaaa to be fl.l.lsd at& tbs 

. 

. - .’ 

.C.. ,’ 

.?:,~ 

. . . 
aaodct tc bc palid.. 

TOus8 Tery ttul~ 

PCtob
#### In the Matter of Pyramid Beverage Corp., Inc., Doing Business as Dawn Beverage Center, Petitioner, v New York State Liquor Authority, Respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent New York State Liquor Authority, dated September 10, 1984, which, after a hearing, (1) found that petitioner had violated Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) in that it sold alcoholic beverages to a person under the age of 19 years, and (2) suspended petitioner’s wholesale beer license for a period of 40 days, of which 20 days were to be served forthwith and 20 days were to be deferred, plus a $5,000 bond forfeiture.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The determination under review is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Moreover, the penalty imposed was not shocking to the conscience *(see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222; *300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176). Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Brown, Niehoff and Fiber, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1107 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1107

To protect consumers by eliminating the double postage rule under which 
the Postal Service requires competitors of the Postal Service to charge 
                          above market prices.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 31, 1997

 Mr. Coverdell introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
           referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To protect consumers by eliminating the double postage rule under which 
the Postal Service requires competitors of the Postal Service to charge 
                          above market prices.

    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 ``Double Postage Rule Elimination 
Act''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF THE DOUBLE POSTAGE RULE.

    Section 601(a) of title 39, United States Code, is amended to read 
as follows:
    ``(a) A letter may be carried out of the mails, if--
            ``(1) the amount paid for private carriage of the letter is 
        $2.00 or more;
            ``(2) the letter is enclosed in an envelope;
            ``(3) the amount of postage which would have been charged 
        on the letter if it had been sent by mail is paid by stamps, or 
        postage meter stamps, on the envelope;
            ``(4) the envelope is properly addressed;
            ``(5) the envelope is so sealed that the letter cannot be 
        taken from it without defacing the envelope;
            ``(6) any stamps on the envelope are canceled in ink by the 
        sender; and
            ``(7) the date of the letter, of its transmission, or 
        receipt by the carrier is endorsed on the envelope in ink.''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by this Act shall take effect 30 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6379

BOBBY R. EDWARDS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD MEMBERS, in their official and individual capacities; SANDRA L.

COMBS, in her official and individual capacity; WINNIE L. DIXON, in her official and

individual capacity; JOSEPH F. LEWIS, in his

official and individual capacity; JOHN B.

METZGER, III, in his official and individual

capacity; LINDA R. PITMAN, in her official and

individual capacity,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge.

(CA-96-128-2)

Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: August 5, 1996

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bobby R. Edwards, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Edwards v. Virginia Parole Bd. Members, No. CA-96-128-2

(E.D. Va. Feb. 22, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1006 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1006

To authorize appropriations for the expansion of the columbarium of the 
               National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 10, 1997

 Mr. Akaka (for himself and Mr. Inouye) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize appropriations for the expansion of the columbarium of the 
               National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE 
              COLUMBARIUM OF THE NATIONAL MEMORIAL CEMETERY OF THE 
              PACIFIC.

    There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs, for the purpose of expanding the columbarium of the 
National Cemetery of the Pacific, $1,500,000, to remain available until 
expended.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Parochial Bus System, Inc., et al., Respondents, v Gregory Kaladjian, as Director of Pupil Transportation of the Board of Education of the City of New York, et al., Appellants.

—Judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 15, 1984, affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Krausman at Special Term. Mangano, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of Dominic Tucci, Petitioner, v Donald Selsky, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

[943 NYS2d 239]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with using a controlled substance after a sample of his urine twice tested positive for the presence of opiates. He was found guilty of the charge following a tier III disciplinary hearing. The determination was later affirmed on administrative appeal and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, positive urinalysis test *1295results and related documentation, together with the testimony of the correction officers who collected and tested the specimen, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt *(see Matter of Demarta v Prack,*85 AD3d 1475,1476 [2011]; *Matter of Stanford v Fischer,*77 AD3d 1013, 1013 [2010]). Petitioner has not preserved his contention that he was improperly denied a witness inasmuch as he did not object at the hearing *(see Matter of Barclay v Knowles,*79 AD3d 1550, 1551 [2010]; *Matter of Brown v Venettozzi,*79 AD3d 1510, 1511 [2010]). Furthermore, his claim that he is entitled to reimbursement for the value of property allegedly lost during his confinement to the special housing unit may not be raised in the context of the instant CPLR article 78 proceeding as such relief must be sought in the Court of Claims *(see*Correction Law § 24 [2]; *Matter of Raqiyb v Goord,*28 AD3d 892, 893 [2006]; *Matter of Harrison v Carpenter,*201 AD2d 848, 848 [1994]).

Mercure, J.P., Rose, Spain, Stein and Garry, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of StarTek, Inc. (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned individuals, 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 Registrant.

 

 
| Date:   May 3, 2011 | /s/A.   LAURENCE JONES                      |
|--------------------------|---------------------------------------------|
|                     | A.   Laurence Jones                         |
|                     | President   and Chief Executive Officer     |
| * *                 | * *                                    |
|                     |                                        |
| Date:   May 3, 2011 | /s/   DAVID G. DURHAM                       |
|                     | David   G. Durham                           |
|                     | Executive   Vice President, Chief Financial |
|                     | Officer   and Treasurer                     |

 

 

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 the Corporation and will be retained by the Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----