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

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

          - [Order No. 1168]

Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: 

Whereas, the New Jersey Commerce and Economic Growth Commission, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 44, submitted an application to the Board for authority to expand FTZ 44 to include the Rockefeller Cranbury Industrial Park (309 acres) in Cranbury Township (Middlesex County), New Jersey (Site 2), within the New York/Newark Customs port of entry (FTZ Docket 52-2000; filed 8/22/00);

                    Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the                     **Federal Register**                     (65 FR 52984, 8/31/00; extended, 65 FR 76218, 12/6/00) and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,                 

Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the public interest;

                    Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders:                           ( print page 31612)    

The application to expand FTZ 44 is approved, subject to the Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of May 2001. 

Faryar Shirzad,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

Dennis Puccinelli,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-14795 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
 
<ARTICLE> 6 
<CIK> 0000744822
<NAME> Fidelity Investment Trust
<SERIES>
 <NUMBER> 141
 <NAME> Fidelity Southeast Asia Fund
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>
<C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 year          
 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             oct-31-1997   
 
<PERIOD-END>                  oct-31-1997   
 
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>         335,800       
 
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>        261,739       
 
<RECEIVABLES>                 18,077        
 
<ASSETS-OTHER>                7,798         
 
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>          0             
 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                287,614       
 
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>      5,096         
 
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>       0             
 
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>     3,671         
 
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>           8,767         
 
<SENIOR-EQUITY>               0             
 
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>      386,752       
 
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>         29,199        
 
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>         51,431        
 
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>     753           
 
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>        0             
 
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>       (33,994)      
 
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>      0             
 
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>      (74,664)      
 
<NET-ASSETS>                  278,847       
 
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>             8,354         
 
<INTEREST-INCOME>             1,522         
 
<OTHER-INCOME>                (845)         
 
<EXPENSES-NET>                7,725         
 
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>       1,306         
 
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>      (28,617)      
 
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>     (92,384)      
 
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>         (119,695)     
 
<EQUALIZATION>                0             
 
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>     8,457         
 
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>      19,898        
 
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>         0             
 
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>       11,475        
 
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>   35,591        
 
<SHARES-REINVESTED>           1,885         
 
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>        (476,499)     
 
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>       4,730         
 
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>     21,952        
 
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>       0             
 
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>    0             
 
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>         4,465         
 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            0             
 
<GROSS-EXPENSE>               7,741         
 
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>          584,686       
 
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>         14.690        
 
<PER-SHARE-NII>               .040          
 
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>       (4.620)       
 
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>          .170          
 
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>     .400          
 
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>          0             
 
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>           9.550         
 
<EXPENSE-RATIO>               132           
 
<AVG-DEBT-OUTSTANDING>        0             
 
<AVG-DEBT-PER-SHARE>          0
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-2278

In re: GARY BUTERRA WILLIAMS,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(No. 3:11-cv-00125-HEH)

Submitted: February 26, 2013 Decided: February 28, 2013

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Buterra Williams, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Gary Buterra Williams petitions for a writ of mandamus

seeking an order compelling the district court to act on his 

petition for removal of a state prosecution. Since Williams 

filed his petition, however, the district court entered an order 

remanding the prosecution to state court. See Buterra v. 

Circuit Court for City of Suffolk, No. 3:11-cv-00125-HEH (E.D. 

Va. Dec. 7, 2012). We therefore deny Williams’ petition as 

moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

PETITION DENIED
## State of N ew York Su p reme Cou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: November 6, 2014 5 18458

________________________________ In the Matter of MARCUS TELESFORD, Petitioner, v MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

________________________________ Calendar Date: September 16, 2014 Before: Peters, P.J., Lahtinen, Stein, Rose and Devine, JJ.

__________ Marcus Telesford, Dannemora, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

__________ 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 respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. Determination confirmed. No opinion. Peters, P.J., Lahtinen, Stein, Rose and Devine, JJ., concur.-2- 518458

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT 32.2
**CERTIFICATIONS**
**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003**
**(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18,**
**United States Code)**
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes – Oxley Act of 2002(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter63 of Title 18,United States Code), the undersigned officer of Spantel Communications Inc., a Floridacorporation (“The Company”), does hereby certify with respect to the Annual report of the Company on Form10-KSB for the period ended December 31,2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“the Form10-KSB”)that:
3) The Form 10 KSB fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934;and 4) the information contained in the Form 10 –KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.       Dated: April 14, 2004 /s/ CESAR MARTINEZ      Cesar Martinez   (Chief Financial Officer)
#### NEW YORK BREWERIES CO., Limited, v. JOHNSON.

(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

May 13, 1909.)

Corporations (§• 657*) — Foreign Corporations — State Laws — Regulation.

General Corporation Law (Laws N. Y. 1904, p. 1250, c. 490), § 15, providing that no foreign stock corporation other than a money corporation shall do business in the state without having first procured from the Secretary of State a certificate that it has complied with all the requirements of law to authorize it to do business in the state, and that no such corporation shall maintain any action in the state on any contract made therein unless prior to making the contract it shall have procured such, certificate, does not make void the contracts of foreign corporations not having complied with the act within the state,' but merely excludes them from the state courts, leaving open to them the federal tribunals.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Corporations, Dec. Dig. § 657.*]

On Demurrer to Separate Defense,

Guggenheimer, Untermyer & Marshall (Abraham Benedict, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Appell & Taylor, for defendant.

*

For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

NOYES, Circuit Judge.

As indicated upon the argument, I think that the statute set up in the separate defense (section 15 of the general corporation law of New York [Laws 1904, p. 1250, c. 490]) does not make void the contracts of foreign corporations not complying with its provisions, but merely excludes such corporations from state courts and leaves open to them the federal tribunals. Groton Bridge, etc., Co. v. American Bridge Co. (C. C.) 151 Fed. 871, is approved and followed.

.The demurrer is sustained, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 157 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 157

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     February 12, 2009.
    Resolved, That it shall be in order at any time through the legislative day 
of February 13, 2009, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House 
suspend the rules. The Speaker or her designee shall consult with the Minority 
Leader or his designee on the designation of any matter for consideration 
pursuant to this section.
    Sec. 2.  The matter after the resolved clause of House Resolution 10 is 
amended to read as follows: ``That unless otherwise ordered, before Monday, May 
18, 2009, the hour of daily meeting of the House shall be 2 p.m. on Mondays; 
noon on Tuesdays; 10 a.m. on Wednesday and Thursday, and 9 a.m. on all other 
days of the week; and from Monday, May 18, 2009, until the end of the first 
session, the hour of daily meeting of the House shall be noon on Mondays; 10 
a.m. on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays; and 9 a.m. on all other days of the 
week.''.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 4, 2019

No. 04-19-00104-CV

IN RE GUARDIANSHIP OF CHARLES INNESS THRASH, an Incapacitated Person,

From the Probate Court No. 2, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017PC2912

Honorable Tom Rickhoff, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On October 31, 2019, appellees Tonya Barina and Mary C. Werner filed a motion to 

dismiss this appeal. Appellants Laura A. Martinez and Brittany A. Martinez opposed that relief. 

After consideration of the motion and response, the motion to dismiss is DENIED. 

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 4th day of December, 2019.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ,

Clerk of Court
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 131 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 131

   Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Financial 
             Services in the One Hundred Eleventh Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 2009

 Mr. Frank of Massachusetts submitted the following resolution; which 
         was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Financial 
             Services in the One Hundred Eleventh Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Financial Services (hereafter 
in this resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including the 
expenses of all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the 
applicable accounts of the House of Representatives for committee 
salaries and expenses, not more than $19,224,887.00 for the One Hundred 
Eleventh Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $9,322,449.00 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2009, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2010; and
            (2) not more than $9,902,438.00 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2010, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2011.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
#### Reginald BELL, Sr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. CITY OF FIFE, a political subdivision and Mayor, John Doe and Jane Doe, husband and wife and the marital community composed thereof, being sued in his official capacity; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 11-35094.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 2011.*

Filed Jan. 10, 2012.

Reginald Bell, Sr., Walla Walla, WA, pro se.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Reginald Bell, Sr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights. Although the district court’s order dismissed the “complaint” rather than the “action,” we interpret it as dismissing the action because the order adopts the report and recommendation in which the magistrate judge determines that further amendment of the complaint would be futile and recommends that the action be dismissed without prejudice. *In re Ford Motor Co./Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.,*264 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir.2001). We therefore have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2). *Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000); *Barren v. Harrington,*152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Bell’s action because Bell alleged only con-clusory allegations of wrongdoing in his amended complaint and failed to attribute specific wrongful conduct to any individual defendant. *See Johnson v. Lucent Techs. Inc.,*653 F.3d 1000, 1010-11 (9th Cir.2011) (a civil complaint “must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face’ ” (citation omitted)).

Bell’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>     0000932623
<NAME>    Red Hot Concepts, Inc.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1997
<CASH>                                         109,255
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               386,454
<PP&E>                                           6,221
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,781,614
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          537,130
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,450,000
<COMMON>                                        34,207
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,781,614
<SALES>                                     11,111,274
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,111,274
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,562,580
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,966,720
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (613,219)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,121,893
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,121,893
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,063,893
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.58
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 32364]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14971]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute, Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel, Small Grants Program for Behavioral Research in Cancer 
Control.
    Date: July 10, 2001.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Holiday Inn, 8120 Wisconsin Ave, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Mary Jane Slesinski, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Special Review and Resources Branch, Division of 
Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, National 
Institutes of Health, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 8045, Bethesda, 
MD 20892, 301/594-1566.
    Any interested person may file written comments with the 
committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed 
on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, 
telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional 
affiliation of the interested person.


(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 7, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-14971 Filed 6-13-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```

[Federal Register: August 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 160)]
[Notices]
[Page 47780]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18au06-49]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, September 1, 2006.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to Be Considered: Surveillance Matters.

For Further Information Contact: Eileen A. Donovan, 202-418-5100.

Eileen A. Donovan,
Acting Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 06-7044 Filed 8-16-06; 11:50 am]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
**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**

 

Pursuant to 18U.S.C. §1350 (adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I,the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Aftermarket Technology Corp. (the“Company”), hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Companyfor the annual period ended December 31, 2003 (the “Report”) fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended, and that information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  February 18, 2004           |
|-----------------------------------------|
|                                    |
|                                    |
| /s/ Barry C.  Kohn                      |   |
| Barry C.  Kohn, Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

This certification will not bedeemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwisesubject to the liability of that section. This certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by referenceinto any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to theextent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.

 

----