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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 1061-103]

On August 26, 2021, Pacific Gas and Electric Company submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) a copy of their application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality certification filed with the California State Water Resources Control Board (California Water Board), in conjunction with the above captioned project. Pursuant to 40 CFR 121.6, we hereby notify the California Water Board of the following:

*Date of Receipt of the Certification Request:*                     August 26, 2021.                

*Reasonable Period of Time to Act on the Certification Request:*                     One year.                

*Date Waiver Occurs for Failure to Act:*                     August 26, 2022.                

If the California Water Board fails or refuses to act on the water quality certification request by the above waiver date, then the agency's certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).

Dated: September 7, 2021.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2021-19677 Filed 9-10-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM GOLDEN BEAR
GOLF, INC.'S FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,397,027
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  593,989
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (195,748)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,752,812
<PP&E>                                       1,342,804
<DEPRECIATION>                               (913,949)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,783,016
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      (8,636,195)
<BONDS>                                    (2,484,494)
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                      (55,050)
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,021,123
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               (6,783,016)
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          (11,238,421)
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,224,868
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (4,654,297)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             (109,835)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (23,781)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,667,850)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    48,768
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,619,082)
<DISCONTINUED>                             (3,195,175)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,814,257)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.42)


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of William S. Goldstein, Petitioner, v Gordon M. Ambach, as Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, et al., Respondents.

Motion to vacate stay contained in order to show cause of Supreme Court, Albany County, dated December 23, 1986, granted, without costs, upon the ground that Supreme Court had no authority to issue such a stay (Education Law § 6510 [5]).

Affirmation in opposition to said motion treated as an application for stay of order of suspension pending determination of review proceeding, and application granted, without costs, and without prejudice to a motion by respondents to vacate stay in the event petitioner shall fail to file and serve brief and appendix within the time specified by section 800.2 (c) of the rules of practice (22 NYCRR). Casey, J. P., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Levine, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v *1002Wyatt Holmes, Appellant.

Memorandum: None of the issues raised by defendant on this appeal from his conviction on 10 counts of robbery in the first degree has any merit, and only one warrants comment. During voir dire and in his opening statement, the prosecutor stated that defendant’s brother, Donald Holmes, would testify for the People as to defendant’s complicity in a robbery of the Berlin Restaurant. Donald Holmes was never produced at trial. The People were permitted to introduce the testimony of an investigator that extensive investigation had failed to uncover the whereabouts of Donald Holmes. The rule is that, absent bad faith or undue prejudice, reversal is not required when the People fail to produce evidence alluded to in their opening statement *(People v De Tore,*34 NY2d 199, 207, *cert denied sub nom. Wedra v New York,*419 US 1025; *cf. People v Cruz,*100 AD2d 882). In this case, there is no evidence of bad faith, and any prejudice was eliminated by the thorough instructions by the trial court, both during trial and in its charge, that the jury was not to speculate as to the testimony of Donald Holmes, that no inferences were to be drawn against the defendant by Donald Holmes’ failure to testify, and that all references made to the missing witness during trial be stricken *(People v De Tore, supra).*(Appeal from judgment of Oneida County Court, Buckley, J. — robbery, first degree.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Denman, Green, Pine and Schnepp, JJ.
(8 Misc. Rep. 1.)

#### WALSH et al. v. MANHATTAN RY. CO.

(Superior Court of New York City, General Term.

April 2, 1894.)

Railroad Companies—Injuries to Persons on Track—Evidence. In an action against an elevated railroad company for the death of plaintiff’s Intestate, it appeared that intestate jumped or fell on the track as the engine was approaching, hut the evidence was conflicting as to whether the engine was far enough away when the engineer first saw intestate on the track to be stopped in time to prevent the injury. *'Held,*that there was sufficient evidence of negligence on the part of defendant to go to the jury.

Appeal from jury term.

Action by Mary Walsh, as administratrix, and Charles H. Mapes, as administrator, against the Manhattan Railway Company to recover damages for alleged negligence causing the dearth of plaintiffs’ intestate. The complaint was dismissed, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Argued before SEDGWICK, C. J., and DUGRO and GILDERSLEEVE, JJ.

Samuel C. Herriman, for appellants.

Davies, Short & Townsend, for respondent.

DUGRO, J.

The plaintiffs’ intestate fell or jumped upon the track of the elevated railroad from the station at Eighteenth street and Third avenue, and was crushed to death by an incoming train. This appeal is from the judgment dismissing the complaint, entered after the defendant had rested. The question presented is, substantially, whether the evidence warranted a submission of the case to the jury. As there was evidence that the engineer saw the deceased fall or jump, whichever he did, the location of the train at the time of this incident was of vital importance. Upon this point the'evidence was conflicting. The engineer testified that when he got to the end of the station, about 25 feet from the deceased, the latter jumped off the platform. Doyle testified that, when the deceased got up from the track, he (the witness) looked south to see where the engine was, and noticed it between Sixteenth and Seventeenth streets. If the jury believed, as they might have, that at the time the engineer saw the deceased leave the platform the train was between Sixteenth and Seventeenth streets, and the engineer’s evidence that he did not put the brakes on until he reached the end of the station, and that they were then on for his regular stop, it might well be that they would have found the accident to have occurred through negligence on the part of the engineer in not using ordinary diligence to stop the train after he saw the deceased upon the track. It may be *73needless to say that, if the accident happened through the engineer’s neglect to use ordinary care after he saw the man upon the track, there would be no question of contributory negligence, except such as might arise upon the point as to whether the deceased used ordinary care in attempting to reach a point of safety, and upon this the evidence would have sustained a finding in plaintiffs’ favor. I think the refusal to submit the case to the jury was error, and that the judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event. All concur.
# C_2021398EN.01001901.xml

| 1.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/19

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10486 — CDPQ/Centerbridge/Medical Solutions)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/13)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (‘CDPQ’, Canada), |
| --- | --- |

—

Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (‘CDPQ’, Canada),

| — | Centerbridge Partners, L.P. (‘Centerbridge’, USA), |
| --- | --- |

—

Centerbridge Partners, L.P. (‘Centerbridge’, USA),

| — | Medical Solutions LLC (‘Medical Solutions’, USA). |
| --- | --- |

—

Medical Solutions LLC (‘Medical Solutions’, USA).

CDPQ and Centerbridge acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Medical Solutions.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | for CDPQ: globally active long-term institutional investor managing funds primarily for public and para-public pension and insurance plans, |
| --- | --- |

—

for CDPQ: globally active long-term institutional investor managing funds primarily for public and para-public pension and insurance plans,

| — | for Centerbridge: global investment management firm active across investment disciplines from private equity to credit and related strategies, and real estate, |
| --- | --- |

—

for Centerbridge: global investment management firm active across investment disciplines from private equity to credit and related strategies, and real estate,

| — | for Medical Solutions: staffing agency specialising in placing registered nurses, allied healthcare professionals, interim clinical leaders, and non-clinical professionals. |
| --- | --- |

—

for Medical Solutions: staffing agency specialising in placing registered nurses, allied healthcare professionals, interim clinical leaders, and non-clinical professionals.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

Case M.10486 — CDPQ/Centerbridge/Medical Solutions

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---
**EXHIBIT
      13.2**






Certification
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




In
      connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of RADCOM Ltd. (the “Company”)
      for the period ended December 31, 2005 (the “Report”), I, David Zigdon, 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 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:
      March 29, 2006







*/s/
      David Zigdon*


David
      Zigdon


Chief
      Financial Officer
Skip to main content

Privacy Policy•Site map

# Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings in the United States Court of Federal Claims

When to File a Complaint of Judicial Misconduct or Disability

Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings

Form for Complaint of Judicial Misconduct or Disability

Guidance on Filing a Complaint of Judicial Misconduct or Disability (Updated Guidance Coming Soon)

Judicial Conduct Opinions

Howard T. Markey National Courts Building • 717 Madison Place, NW, Washington, DC 20439 • 202-357-6400
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       7,424,540
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                              207,249,865
<ALLOWANCES>                                10,558,445
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      14,212,159
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,751,792
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             225,714,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                    204,307,156
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     69,748
<COMMON>                                     7,977,914
<OTHER-SE>                                 225,714,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                     23,333,904
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            15,097,341
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             3,151,990
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,663,352
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (113,731)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  117,135
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (81,443)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (81,443)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)


</TABLE>
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 Quarterly Report of Northwest Pipe Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John D. Murakami, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                       
|---------------------------------------
|/s/ John D. Murakami                   
|John D. Murakami                       
|Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
|May 4, 2007
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:*                         September 22, 2021.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on September 16, 2021, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 201 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2021-130, CP2021-135.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2021-20516 Filed 9-21-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
----

|   | 1. | The      Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));      and |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The      information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      the Company. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |    /s/  Raymond      R. Brandstrom |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Raymond      R. Brandstrom                                  |
|   | Chief      Financial Officer                                |
|   | August      6, 2009                                         |

----
# C_2021030EN.01000101.xml

| 27.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 30/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 30/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9977 — EPGC/Metro)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 30/01)

On 15 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9977. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9977. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---