alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register: September 3, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 170)]
[Notices]
[Page 46484]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03se97-32]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, September 25, 1997.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington, D.C., 9th Floor Conference
Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Enforcement Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 97-23488 Filed 8-29-97; 1:18 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO    INDEX ========**

----
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification ofPrincipal Executive Officer**

Pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, the undersigned officer of Valentis, Inc. (the “Company”) herebycertifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

(i)            the accompanyingAnnual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended June 30,2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) orSection 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended; and

(ii)        theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: September 28, 2006 |     | /s/ BENJAMIN  F. MCGRAW, III       |
|------------------------------------|----------|-----------------------------------------|
|                               |     | Benjamin F. McGraw, III, Pharm.D.  |
|                               | * * | *President and Chief Executive Officer* |
|                               | * * | *(Principal Executive Officer)*         |

 

----
# C_2010343EN.01001801.xml

| 17.12.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 343/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.12.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 343/18

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

2010/C 343/12

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 7.6.2010 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 7.6.2010-31.12.2010 |
| Member State | Sweden |
| Stock or Group of stocks | SOL/3A/BCD |
| Species | Common sole (Solea solea) |
| Zone | IIIa; EU waters of IIIb, IIIc and IIId |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | — |

Date and time of closure

7.6.2010

Duration

7.6.2010-31.12.2010

Member State

Sweden

Stock or Group of stocks

SOL/3A/BCD

Species

Common sole (Solea solea)

Solea solea

Zone

IIIa; EU waters of IIIb, IIIc and IIId

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

—

Web link to the decision of the Member State:

http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/fishing_rules/tacs/index_en.htm

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
#### In re: Julian Edward ROCHESTER, Petitioner.

No. 08-1910.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Aug. 28, 2008.

Decided: Aug. 29, 2008.

Julian Edward Rochester, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*227PER CURIAM:

Petitioner has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and a pro se petition for writ of mandamus pursuant to the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771.

The Crime Victims’ Rights Act affords to victims of crime the rights to receive notice of court proceedings, to be heard at court proceedings, to confer with government counsel, to receive restitution, to be free from unreasonable delay, and to be treated with fairness. 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a). The Act provides that these rights shall be asserted in the district court and that “[i]f the district court denies the relief sought, the movant may petition the court of appeals for a writ of mandamus.” 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(3). If such a petition is filed, “[t]he court of appeals shall take up and decide such application forthwith within 72 hours after the petition has been filed.” *Id.*Furthermore, “[i]f the court of appeals denies the relief sought, the reasons for the denial shall be clearly stated on the record in a written opinion.” *Id.*

Petitioner Rochester moves, as a kidnap victim, for relief from his “kidnapped status.” He asserts that he has been held in state custody 23 years, 9 months, and 17 1/2 days beyond his maximum release date for crimes that carried no penalty or only a fine. He claims to be the victim of forged warrants, conspiracy, double jeopardy violations, threats, and other illegalities.

Petitioner has raised these and other claims in numerous actions in the district court and on appeal. He has been subject to a pre-filing review order in the District of South Carolina since January 1996. *In re Rochester,*Misc. No. 2:95-MC-131 (D.S.C. Jan. 29, 1996). He has filed 29 prior cases in this Court and been granted relief in none of them.

The statutory provision for expedited mandamus review of the district court’s denial of rights asserted under 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a) has no application to the claims asserted by Rochester. Rochester’s claims are attacks on the legality of his confinement, which have been fully litigated in prior habeas corpus actions. He has not been denied any right under 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a) which could form the basis for a mandamus petition to this Court.

Accordingly, the Court denies the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismisses this mandamus petition. Petitioner is warned that any further effort to raise these claims will result in issuance of an order to show cause why a pre-filing injunction should not be entered against him by this Court. *See In re Vincent,*105 F.3d 943 (4th Cir.1997).

*PETITION DISMISSED.*
| **--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| DOCUMENT: | **CL** | **2** |
|-----------|--------|-------|

|  | **Futures Industry Association (FIA)     and Managed Funds Association (MFA),** |
|--|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | **Requesting Extension of Comment     Period** |
|--|-------------------------------------------------|

| DATE: |  | 8/15/01 | FR PAGE: |  | N/A | PAGES: |  | 2 | PDF SIZE: | 45 KB | PDF LINK: | /files/foia/ |
|-------|--|---------|----------|--|-----|--------|--|---|-----------|-------|-----------|--------------|

|  | **--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| **--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| DOCUMENT: | **CL** | **1** |
|-----------|--------|-------|

|  | **Johnson, Philip McBride** |
|--|-----------------------------|

| DATE: | FR PAGE: |  | N/A | PAGES: | 1 | PDF SIZE: | 30 KB | PDF LINK: | /files/foia/ |
|-------|----------|--|-----|--------|---|-----------|-------|-----------|--------------|

|  | **--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

First
Previous
Next
Last

�
<PAGE>

Exhibit 10.23


            Description of Executive Officer Retention Arrangements


The Company has agreed that, for the period from May 9, 2005 through May 9,
2006, the Company either (i) will not terminate an executive officer without
cause with less than six months' notice or (ii) will provide the executive
officer with salary continuation and medical benefits for the period beginning
on the date of termination without cause and ending on the date that is six
months from the date on which notice of termination was provided to the
executive officer.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 18 - 0646

_________________ STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ZACHARY BRENNAN NEWBARY,

Defendant and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ P ursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to the Court sitting en banc. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to Zachary Newbary, to all counsel of r ecord , and to the Honorable John W. Larson , District J udge . For the Court,

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

March 18 2020

03/18/2020
Case Number: DA 18-0646
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 ImmunoBiotics., Inc. (the "Registrant")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Vithal J.
Rajadhyaksha , certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:
  (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.
    /s/
      Vithal J. RajadhyakshaVithal
      J. Rajadhyaksha
                Chief
      Financial Officer
   August
13, 2008
EX-32.1 CERTIFICATION   PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I, Ronald A. Davis, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Bella Viaggio, Inc. (the "Company") certify that:  1. I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bella Viaggio, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report; and  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the period presented in this quarterly report.  Date: November 23, 2009   /s/ Ronald A. Davis Ronald A. Davis, Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer