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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 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 Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel Review; Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBRE) (P20) Applications.                    

*Date:*                         July 18-19, 2022.                    

*Time:*                         10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute of General Medical Science, Natcher Bldg. 45, Center Drive Bethesda, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Manas Chattopadhyay, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Dr., Bethesda, MD 20872,                         *manasc@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: April 22, 2022. 

Miguelina Perez, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-08953 Filed 4-26-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Exhibit 32.1 - Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)

                        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 Annual Report of RPM Advantage, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report").

I, David R. Pressler, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

               (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/ David R. Pressler
--------------------------
    David R. Pressler
    CEO President and Director


Date  April 25, 2011
      -----------------
In Re Ramsey RANDALL, petitioner.

No. 17-5512.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 11, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. **

**SECTION      1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF      2002**

| (1) |   | This                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 this Report fairly represents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the                Registrant.   |
|-----|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                January 9, 2007 | By:                                                                 | /s/ David                Koos |
|--------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|
|                                 | David                KoosPresident                and Chief Executive Officer |
```
 
 
NATURAL GAS ICE HENRY HUB - ICE OTC                                  Code-023391
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 02/23/10                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2,500 MMBTU'S)                                      OPEN INTEREST:    3,922,259
COMMITMENTS
 565,383   89,212  1189632  2134153  2623806  3889168  3902650   33,091   19,609

CHANGES FROM 02/16/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    -33,775)
 -16,235   31,746  -15,905   11,374  -34,794  -20,766  -18,953  -13,009  -14,822

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    14.4      2.3     30.3     54.4     66.9     99.2     99.5      0.8      0.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      206)
      38       35       68      125      122      197      193
```

----

Updated February 26, 2010
Ken NOWLIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-1045.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
NO. 07-02-0052-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

MAY 28, 2002

______________________________

BETTY ANN NEWBY, 

Appellant

v.

TISDALE SIDING, INC.

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF HUTCHINSON COUNTY;

NO. 5681; HON. JACK WORSHAM, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before BOYD, C.J., and QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.

Appellant Betty Ann Newby, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal from the trial

court’s judgment dated October 7, 2001. Both the clerk’s record and reporter’s record have

been filed. Appellant’s brief was originally due March 4, 2002, which date came and went

without a brief or extension being filed. The Court notified appellant on March 14, 2002,

that the brief was past due and that failure to reasonably explain the reasons therefor could

result in dismissal. On March 15, 2002, a motion for extension of time to file the brief was

filed and appellant was granted an extension until March 29, 2002. So too was she
admonished that no further extensions would be granted without extreme and unusual

circumstances. The March 29, 2002 deadline passed without appellant filing either a brief

or a further motion to extend the deadline. The Court then dismissed the cause for want

of prosecution on April 4, 2002. This resulted in the appellant filing a motion for rehearing

wherein Newby contended that she was denied notice of the court’s intent to dismiss if the

brief was not filed. Concluding that such notice was not afforded her, the Court granted

the motion for rehearing and reinstated the cause. However, it ordered appellant to file her

brief no later than ten days from the order dated May 9, 2002 and notified her that the

failure to comply would result in dismissal of the cause. Ten days passed without appellant

filing either a brief or a further motion to extend the deadline. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P.

38.8(a)(1) and 42.3(b) and (c).

Per Curiam

 

Do not publish.
# L_2011196EN.01002601.xml

| 28.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 196/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 196/26

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 48/2011

of 20 May 2011

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 132/2007 of 26 October 2007 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 132/2007 of 26 October 2007 (1).

| (2) | Commission Directive 2008/47/EC of 8 April 2008 amending, for the purposes of adapting to technical progress, Council Directive 75/324/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to aerosol dispensers (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Directive 2008/47/EC of 8 April 2008 amending, for the purposes of adapting to technical progress, Council Directive 75/324/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to aerosol dispensers (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 1 (Council Directive 75/324/EEC) of Chapter VIII of Annex II to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32008 L 0047: Commission Directive 2008/47/EC of 8 April 2008 (OJ L 96, 9.4.2008, p. 15).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32008 L 0047: Commission Directive 2008/47/EC of 8 April 2008 (OJ L 96, 9.4.2008, p. 15).’

Article 2

The text of Directive 2008/47/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 21 May 2011, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 20 May 2011.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The Acting President

Gianluca GRIPPA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 100, 10.4.2008, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 96, 9.4.2008, p. 15.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Travis Hunter BLANK, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5026.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 4, 2017.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                   Exhibit 11

                   HANOVER FOODS CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                       Computation of Earnings Per Share
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Twenty-six weeks ended     Thirteen weeks ended
                            ------------------------  ------------------------
                            December 1,  December 3,  December 1,  December 3,  
                                   1996         1995         1996         1995
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                          <C>            <C>        <C>            <C> 
PRIMARY

Earnings:
  Net earnings               $3,565,000     624,000    2,314,000      703,000
  Preferred stock dividends     (16,000)    (16,000)      (8,000)      (8,000)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Net earnings applicable to
  common stock               $3,549,000     608,000    2,306,000      695,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SHARES

Weighted average number of
  shares outstanding            720,556     732,213      719,177      732,213
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Net earnings per share -- 
  primary                    $     4.93         .83         3.21          .95
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

December 28, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 134515 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 134515 COA: 274365 St. Clair CC: 02-000189-FH DEAN PHILIP ANDREWS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the June 18, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

d1217 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 28, 2007

Clerk
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 05/04/10                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:       75,048
COMMITMENTS
   1,568    9,185    5,377   53,452   43,029   60,397   57,591   14,651   17,457

CHANGES FROM 04/27/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      6,214)
     -37    2,615      977    3,146      224    4,086    3,816    2,128    2,398

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     2.1     12.2      7.2     71.2     57.3     80.5     76.7     19.5     23.3

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       50)
       6       15        9       24       25       37       42
```

----

Updated May 7, 2010
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 12

- 00411

- CR

Dominique Paul GRAHAM

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No

. 2, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. CCL

- 11

- 1291

Honorable Frank Follis, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED April 17, 2013.

_____________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4587 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require certain institutions 

of higher education to provide notice of tuition levels for students. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 1, 2019 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT (for himself, Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. BISHOP

of Georgia, Mr. CONNOLLY, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY

of New York, Mr. PETERS, Mr. TONKO, Mr. VARGAS, and Mr. 

FITZPATRICK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require 

certain institutions of higher education to provide notice 

of tuition levels for students. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Truth in Tuition Act 

5 of 2019’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4587 IH

1 SEC. 2. NOTICE OF TUITION LEVELS. 

2 (a) AMENDMENT.—Section 487(a) of the Higher 

3 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094(a)) is amended 

4 by adding at the end the following new paragraph: 

5 ‘‘(30)(A) The institution will provide to each 

6 student admitted to an undergraduate or graduate 

7 program— 

8 ‘‘(i) a multi-year tuition and fee schedule; 

9 or 

10 ‘‘(ii) a single-year tuition and fee schedule, 

11 and a nonbinding, multi-year estimate of net 

12 costs after all financial aid is awarded, assum13 ing constant family and student income, assets, 

14 and relevant circumstances. 

15 ‘‘(B) Multi-year schedules and estimates re16 quired by subparagraph (A)— 

17 ‘‘(i) may include a percentage or dollar in18 crease or decrease of any size the institution de19 termines to be appropriate from one year to the 

20 next; and 

21 ‘‘(ii) shall indicate, on a year-by-year basis, 

22 costs for the normal duration of such student’s 

23 undergraduate or graduate program. 

24 ‘‘(C) Institutions that elect a single-year tuition 

25 and fee schedule under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall 

26 include with each multi-year estimate provided under 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4587 IH

1 such subparagraph the average deviation, in percent2 age terms, between previous year estimates and ac3 tual net costs for students at their institution. 

4 ‘‘(D) The Secretary shall waive the require5 ments of subparagraph (A) if the institution dem6 onstrates to the Secretary that the requirements of 

7 subparagraph (A) are not practicable because of the 

8 occurrence of one or more events causing the institu9 tion severe economic distress, dramatic reduction of 

10 State or Federal aid, or any other circumstance de11 termined to be appropriate by the Secretary.’’. 

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

13 subsection (a) shall be effective on the date that is 120 

14 days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Eric VANDERBECK, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6447.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 27, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
```
  
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 06/16/09          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       36,479
COMMITMENTS
   8,135    1,047    4,880   12,937   19,015   25,951   24,942   10,528   11,537

CHANGES FROM 06/09/09 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      1,735)
     357      924    1,348    1,763      299    3,468    2,572   -1,733     -837

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    22.3      2.9     13.4     35.5     52.1     71.1     68.4     28.9     31.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       43)
       8        5       13       21       20       39       33
```

----

Updated June 19, 2009
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACTAPPEALS Appeal of

-- ) ) Technology Systems, Inc. ) ) Under Contract Nos. N00039-07-C-0006 ) N00014-07-C-0236 ) N00014-07-C-0340 ) NOO 178-05-D-4527 ) APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT:

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 60126

Mr. Charles Benton

President/Owner E. Michael Chiaparas, Esq.

DCMA ChiefTrial Attorney Debra Berg, Esq.

Trial Attorney Defense Contract Management Agency Boston, MA ORDER OF DISMISSAL By status report filed on 6 March 2017, the government informed the Board that the parties had come to an agreement overthe issues in this appeal and that it would not objectto its dismissal with prejudice once appellant filed the anticipated request. On 7 March 2017, appellant submitted a letter to the Board requesting the dismissal ofthis appeal with prejudice. Accordingly, it is dismissed from the Board's docket with prejudice. Dated: 10 March 2017

# J~ Administrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContract AppealsI certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCANo. 60126, Appeal ofTechnology Systems, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

2 JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
**Exhibit      21.1**

**Subsidiaries      of Technest Holdings, Inc.**

|   | 1. | Genex                Technologies, Incorporated, a Maryland corporation, doing business                as                Genex Technologies, Inc. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
|   | 2. | Argus                Sensors, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, doing business as Argus Sensors,                Inc. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
|   | 3. | E-OIR                Technologies, Inc., a Virginia corporation, doing business as EOIR                Technologies, Inc. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|