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

###### Administration on Aging 

# AGENCY:

Administration on Aging, HHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to Section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the eighth Policy Committee meeting concerning planning for the 2005 White House Conference on Aging. The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should inform the contact person listed below in advance of the meeting. This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to scheduling problems. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, October 25, 2005, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held in the Atrium Ballroom at The Washington Court Hotel, 525 New Jersey Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20001-1527. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Kim Butcher at (301) 443-2887, or e-mail at                         *http://www.Kim.Butcher@whcoa.gov*. Registration is not required. Seating is on a first come, first-served basis.                     

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to the Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-501, November 2000), the Policy Committee will meet to finalize discussions and planning, including a vote on the Annotated Agenda, for the 2005 WHCoA that will be held from December 11 through 14, 2005 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in Washington, DC. 

Dated: October 13, 2005. 

Edwin L. Walker, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Programs. 

[FR Doc. 05-20834 Filed 10-17-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4154-01-P
Exhibit
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**NANOSENSORS,
      INC.**


**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 NanoSensors, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending August 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert Baron,
      Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act,
      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.


Date: October
                12, 2007
              
              /s/ Robert
                BaronRobert
                BaronInterim
                  Chief Executive
                  Officer




*This
      Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the
      date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language
      contained in such filing. A signed original of this written statement required
      by Section 906 has been provided to NanoSensors, Inc. and will be retained
      by NanoSensors, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      or
      its staff upon request* *.*
_____________

No. 96-1841SD

_____________

James H. Big Boy, for Edward *

V. Big Boy, *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the District

v. * of South Dakota.

*

Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner * [UNPUBLISHED]

of Social Security *

Administration, *

*

Appellee. *

_____________

Submitted: November 22, 1996

 Filed: November 27, 1996

_____________

Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

James H. Big Boy appeals the district court's dismissal of Big Boy's

action for judicial review for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. After

careful review of the parties' briefs, we affirm for the reasons stated in

the district court opinion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### COMMERCIAL CREDIT CORPORATION v. BOBBY JOE McCORKLE

No. 7326DC448

(Filed 12 September 1973)

1. Rules of Civil Procedure § 56 — summary judgment — denial of debt — issue of material fact

Where a defendant denies the existence of the debt alleged, defendant’s denial raises a genuine issue as to a material fact unless admissions by defendant clearly show that his denial of the debt is utterly baseless in fact.

2. Bills and Notes § 20; Rules of Civil Procedure § 56 — denial of debt — summary judgment on pleadings — error

In this action to recover a sum allegedly due from defendant under a Transfer of Interest Agreement executed by defendant, the trial court erred in entering summary judgment for plaintiff upon a consideration of the pleadings alone where defendant admitted that he executed the Transfer of Interest Agreement but denied that he owed plaintiff a balance as alleged.

Appeal by defendant from *Stukes, District Court Judge,*12 March 1973 Session of District Court held in Mecklenburg County.

Plaintiff instituted this action to recover the sum of $192.76, plus interest, which it alleged was due from defendant under a Transfer of Interest. Agreement executed by defendant. Defendant admitted the execution of the transfer agreement but denied that he failed to make payments and denied that he owed plaintiff a balance as alleged. Thereafter, plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment which was granted. Defendant appealed.

*Fairley, Hamrick, Monteith & Cobb, by Laurence A» Cobb, for plaintiff.*

*Joseph B. Roberts III for defendant.*

BROCK, Chief Judge.

The record on appeal reflects that summary judgment was rendered upon a consideration of the pleadings alone. In the pleadings defendant denied the allegation of the amount alleged by plaintiff to be due under the contract. Plaintiff offered no supporting affidavits, depositions, or answers to interrogatories, but elected to stand upon its allegation in its complaint of a sum due which defendant denied. According to the stipulations *398filed in this Court both the complaint and the answer were verified.

[1, 2] The trial court, upon motion for summary judgment under Rule 56, should not undertake to resolve an issue of credibility. *Lee v. Shor,*10 N.C. App. 231, 178 S.E. 2d 101. In this case plaintiff alleges defendant is indebted to plaintiff; defendant denies the allegation. Where a defendant denies the existence of the debt alleged, unless admissions by defendant clearly show- that his denial of the debt is utterly baseless in fact, defendant’s denial raises a genuine issue as to a material fact. Where a genuine issue as to a material fact is raised," summary judgment is improper. *See*G.S. 1A-1, Rule 56(c). In this case defendant’s admission that he executed the Transfer of Interest Agreement does not render his denial of the debt to be baseless. From the pleadings alone it cannot be determined as a fact, that defendant owes the plaintiff a sum of money in any ¿mount.

Reversed.

Judges. Morris and Parker concur.
Exhibit 32.2



Educate, Inc.



Certification of Principal Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)



I, Kevin E. Shaffer, Chief Financial Officer of Educate, Inc. (the Company),
certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/ Kevin E. ShafferName:

Kevin E. ShafferDate:

August 12, 2005




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
cc: Hon. Carolyn Ellsworth, District Judge 

The Law Office of Dan M. Winder, P.C. 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A 41418*4
Smith Barney Futures Management LLC
                                    388 Greenwich Street, 7th Floor
                                     New York, New York 10013-2396






June 11, 2001



Campbell & Company, Inc.
Court Tower Building, Towson
210 West Pennsylvania Avenue
Suite 770
Baltimore, MD 212104


Attn: Mrs. Theresa D. Becks

     Re: Management Agreement Renewals

Dear Mrs. Becks:

     We are writing with respect to your  management  agreements  concerning the
commodity pools to which reference is made below (the "Management  Agreements").
We are extending the term of the Management Agreements through June 30, 2002 and
all other provisions of the Management Agreements will remain unchanged.

o        Smith Barney Potomac Futures  Fund L.P.
o        Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P.
o        Smith Barney Global Markets Futures Fund
o        Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. II
o        Smith Barney Campbell F.M. and Energy Fund plc
o        Smith Barney Global Diversified Futures Fund L.P.
o        Smith Barney Diversified 2000 Futures Fund L.P.

     Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this
letter and returning it to the attention of Mr. Daniel  McAuliffe at the address
above or fax to  212-723-8985.  If you have any  questions  I can be  reached at
212-723-5435.

Very truly yours,

SMITH BARNEY FUTURES MANAGEMENT LLC


By:      /s/  Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.
         -----------------------------
         Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.
         Chief Financial Officer & Director

AGREED AND ACCEPTED

CAMPBELL & COMPANY, INC.


By:        /S/ Theresa D. Becks
          -----------------------------

Print Name:  Theresa D. Becks
         -----------------------------
             Chief Financial Officer

DRMcA/sr
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4738 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4738

To prohibit the use of Department of Defense military installations in 
 the United States, its territories or possessions for the prosecution 
 of individuals involved in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 3, 2010

Mr. McKeon (for himself, Mr. Wittman, Mrs. McMorris Rodgers, Mr. Bishop 
of Utah, Mr. Shuster, Mr. Akin, Mr. Fleming, Mr. Hunter, Mr. LoBiondo, 
Mr. Coffman of Colorado, Mr. Turner, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, Mr. 
 Platts, Mr. Rooney, Mr. Conaway, Mr. Miller of Florida, Mr. Franks of 
  Arizona, and Mr. Kline of Minnesota) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit the use of Department of Defense military installations in 
 the United States, its territories or possessions for the prosecution 
 of individuals involved in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
              INSTALLATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, ITS TERRITORIES OR 
              POSSESSIONS FOR THE PROSECUTION OF INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED 
              IN THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, TERRORIST ATTACKS.

    (a) Prohibition.--None of the installations owned, operated, or 
under the effective control of the Department of Defense that are 
located in the United States, its territories or possessions, may be 
used to commence or continue the prosecution in an Article III court of 
the United States of an individual described in subsection (b) for any 
offense that may be prosecuted by military commission under chapter 47A 
of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions 
Act of 2009 (title XVIII of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84))).
    (b) Covered Individuals.--An individual described in this 
subsection is an individual suspected of planning, authorizing, 
organizing, committing, or aiding the attacks on the United States and 
its citizens that occurred on September 11, 2001, who--
            (1) is not a citizen of the United States; and
            (2) is subject to jurisdiction under chapter 47A of title 
        10, United States Code (as so amended).
    (c) Article III Court of the United States Defined.--In this 
section, the term ``Article III court of the United States'' means a 
court of the United States established pursuant to Article III of the 
Constitution of the United States.
                                 <all>
```
# Úřední věstník C 280A/9. s

| | ISSN 1977-0863 |
| --- | --- |
| Úřední věstník
  Evropské unie | C 280A |
| | |
| České vydání | Informace a oznámení | Ročník 669. srpna 2023 |

ISSN 1977-0863

Úřední věstník

Evropské unie

C 280A

České vydání

Informace a oznámení

Ročník 669. srpna 2023

---

| Obsah | Strana |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Oznámení |
| | SPRÁVNÍ ŘÍZENÍ |
| | Evropský úřad pro výběr personálu (EPSO) |
| 2023/C 280 A/01 | Oznámení, kterým se mění oznámení o otevřeném výběrovém řízení – EPSO/AD/402/23 – Administrátoři (AD 6) v těchto oborech: 1. Mikroekonomie/makroekonomie 2. Finanční ekonomie 3. Průmyslová ekonomie ( Úř. věst. C 220 A, 22.6.2023 ) | 1 |

Obsah

Strana

V   Oznámení

SPRÁVNÍ ŘÍZENÍ

Evropský úřad pro výběr personálu (EPSO)

2023/C 280 A/01

Oznámení, kterým se mění oznámení o otevřeném výběrovém řízení – EPSO/AD/402/23 – Administrátoři (AD 6) v těchto oborech: 1. Mikroekonomie/makroekonomie 2. Finanční ekonomie 3. Průmyslová ekonomie ( Úř. věst. C 220 A, 22.6.2023 )

( Úř. věst. C 220 A, 22.6.2023 )

1

---

| CS | |
| --- | --- |

CS

---

V Oznámení

SPRÁVNÍ ŘÍZENÍ

Evropský úřad pro výběr personálu (EPSO)

| 9.8.2023 | CS | Úřední věstník Evropské unie | CA 280/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.8.2023

CS

Úřední věstník Evropské unie

CA 280/1

---

Oznámení, kterým se mění oznámení o otevřeném výběrovém řízení – EPSO/AD/402/23 – Administrátoři (AD 6) v těchto oborech: 1. Mikroekonomie/makroekonomie 2. Finanční ekonomie 3. Průmyslová ekonomie

(
  Úřední věstník Evropské unie C 220 A ze dne 22. června 2023
  )

(2023/C 280 A/01)

Strana 1:

| místo: | „Lhůta pro podání přihlášky: do 25. července 2023, 12:00 hodin (poledne) bruselského času“, |
| --- | --- |

místo:

„Lhůta pro podání přihlášky: do 25. července 2023, 12:00 hodin (poledne) bruselského času“,

| má být: | „Lhůta pro podání přihlášky: do 26. července 2023, 12:00 hodin (poledne) bruselského času“. |
| --- | --- |

má být:

má být:

„Lhůta pro podání přihlášky: do 26. července 2023, 12:00 hodin (poledne) bruselského času“.

Strana 5:

| místo: | „Uchazeči musí přihlášku podat online prostřednictvím
  internetových stránek EPSO (2)
  , a to: do 25. července 2023, 12:00 hodin (poledne) bruselského času“, |
| --- | --- |

místo:

místo:

„Uchazeči musí přihlášku podat online prostřednictvím
  internetových stránek EPSO (2)
  , a to: do 25. července 2023, 12:00 hodin (poledne) bruselského času“,

| má být: | „Uchazeči musí přihlášku podat online prostřednictvím
  internetových stránek EPSO (2), a to: do 26. července 2023, 12:00 hodin (poledne) bruselského času“. |
| --- | --- |

má být:

má být:

„Uchazeči musí přihlášku podat online prostřednictvím
  internetových stránek EPSO (2), a to: do 26. července 2023, 12:00 hodin (poledne) bruselského času“.

---

(2)  https://epso.europa.eu/cs/job-opportunities/open-for-application

2

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Dexter Troy POUNDS.

No. 2002-KO-2766.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 5, 2003.

In re Pounds, Dexter Troy;—Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 08-00-58; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 KA 0064.

Denied.
Exhibit 99.1

<PAGE>
                     [Letterhead of Union Planters Mortgage]




                    UNION PLANTERS BANK, National Association
                          ANNUAL OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE


Pursuant to Section 3.12(a) of the Standard Terms to Pooling and Servicing
Agreement (May 1998 edition) which is incorporated in the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement dated May 1, 1998 among Union Planters Mortgage Finance Corporation,
Union Planters Bank, N.A. (the "Master Servicer") and The Bank of New York, the
undersigned officer of the Master Servicer hereby certifies that a review of the
activities of the Master Servicer during the period May 1, 1998 through December
31, 1998 and its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been
made under his supervision and to the best of his knowledge, based on such
review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Pooling
and Servicing Agreement through such period.



By:  /s/ Mark E. Mosteller
     ---------------------

Name:    Mark E. Mosteller

Title:   Senior Vice President

Date:    March 9, 1999
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

__________________________
PAMELA R. JONES , Petitioner

,

v.
DEPARTMENT OF THE AR MY , Respondent

.

__________________________

201 3- 3169

__________________________ Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. DA0752120521 -I-1

.

__________________________
O R D E R

__________________________ Upon review of this recently docketed ap peal, it a ppears that Pamela R. Jones’ appeal was not timely filed.

On May 30, 2013 , the Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) issued a final order dismissing her case for lack of jurisdiction

. The court received her notice of appeal on July 31, 2013 ; 62 days after the Board issued its decision

. Our review of a Board decision or order is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1), which provides in relevant part that “[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, any pet ition for review shall be filed within 60 days after the Case: 13-3169 Document: 8 Page: 1 Filed: 10/02/2013JONES v. ARMY 2

Board issues notice of the final or der or decision o f the Board.” 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)(A). This filing period is “statutory, mandatory, [and] jurisdictional.” Monzo v. Dep’t of Transp. , 735 F.2d 1335, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 1984); see also Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205 (2007) (the timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement that cannot be waived). Accordingly,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT : (1) Jones is directed to show cause, within 21 days of the date of filing of this order

, why this appeal should not be dismissed as untimely. The Department of the Army may also respond within that time. (2) The briefing schedule is stayed.

F OR T HE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk

s 26 Case: 13-3169 Document: 8 Page: 2 Filed: 10/02/2013
June 1, 1999

Eagle Trading Systems Inc.
47 Hulfish St. - Suite 420
Princeton, N.J. 08542

Attn: Mr. Menachen Sternberg


         Re:      Management Agreement Renewal
                  SSB Global Diversified Futures Fund L.P.

Dear Mr. Sternberg:
We are  writing  with  respect  to  your  management  agreement  concerning  the
commodity pool to which reference is made above (the "Management Agreement"). We
would like to extend the term of the Management  Agreement through June 30, 2000
and all other provisions of the Management Agreement will remain unchanged.

Please indicate your agreement to and acceptance of this modification by signing
one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Mr. Daniel Dantuono
at the address above or fax to 212-723-8985.  If you have any questions I can be
reached at 212-723-5416.

Very truly yours,

SMITH BARNEY FUTURES MANAGEMENT INC.



By:
         Daniel A. Dantuono
         Chief Financial Officer,
         Director & Treasurer


AGREED AND ACCEPTED

EAGLE TRADING SYSTEMS INC.

By:

Print Name:

DAD/sr
STATE of North Carolina v. Damien Markese PRUITT

No. 224P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 20, 2018

Dylan J.C. Buffum, Attorney at Law, for Pruitt, Damien Markese.

Ashish K. Sharda, Assistant Attorney General, Erika N. Jones, Attorney at Law, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th of July 2018 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of September 2018."