alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 23, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 70880]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23208]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Extension of Public Comment Period

    On October 6, 2005, a proposed consent decree in United States v. 
General Electric Company, Civil Action No. 50-cv-1270, was lodged with 
the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. 
The proposed consent decree will settle the United States' claims under 
the Comprehensive Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 
9601, et seq., relating to the release of polychlorinated biphenyls 
into the Hudson River. Notice of the lodging of the proposed Consent 
Decree appeared in 70 FR 59771 (October 13, 2005).
    Notice is hereby given that the Department of Justice has extended 
for thirty (30) days the length of the period during which it will 
receive comments relating to the proposed consent decree. Therefore, 
the Department of Justice will now receive comments through December 
14, 2005. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney 
General of the Environment and Natural Resources Division, Department 
of Justice, Washington, DC 20530, and should refer to United States v. 
General Electric Company, Civil Action No. 05-cv-1270, D.J. Ref. 90-11-
2-529. Directions for examining and/or obtaining a copy of the proposed 
consent decree may be found in the original Federal Register notice 
cited above.

Maureen Katz,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 05-23208 Filed 11-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1831

THIERNO ABDUL KARIM BAH,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A98-379-303)

Submitted: February 14, 2007 Decided: March 6, 2007

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sopo Ngwa, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D.

Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wendtland, Assistant

Director, Claire L. Workman, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION,

Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Thierno Abdul Karim Bah, a native and citizen of Guinea,

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of his

applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection

under the Convention Against Torture. 

To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility

for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was

so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the

requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S.

478, 483-84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and

conclude that Bah fails to show that the evidence compels a

contrary result. Having failed to establish eligibility for

asylum, Bah cannot meet the higher standard to qualify for

withholding of removal. Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir.

1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
EXHIBIT
(32)




CERTIFICATION
OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS*




Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, each of the undersigned officers of La-Z-Boy
Incorporated (the “Company”) hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that
the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 24, 2010
(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d),
as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/ Kurt L. DarrowKurt
      L. DarrowPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerAugust
      17, 2010/s/ Louis M. Riccio, Jr.Louis
      M. Riccio, Jr.Senior
      Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerAugust
      17, 2010




*The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.
EXHIBIT 32
                                                                      ----------

               CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
           AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of North American Galvanizing &
Coatings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2007
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), each of the
undersigned hereby certifies in his or her capacity as an office of the Company,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that to his or her 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
the results of operations of the Company.



                                     NORTH AMERICAN GALVANIZING & COATINGS, INC.
                                                    (Registrant)



                                              /s/ Ronald J. Evans
                                              -----------------------
                                              President and
                                              Chief Executive Officer
                                              (Principal Executive Officer)

                                              /s/ Beth B. Hood
                                              -----------------------
                                              Vice President and
                                              Chief Financial Officer
                                              (Principal Financial Officer)

Date: July 30, 2007
#### JARRELL v. SAMSONITE CORP.

No. 79 PC.

Case below: 12 N.C. App. 673.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 January 1972.
Consulting Agreement



Between:



Robert Tomjlenovic;



And



Global Precision Medical Inc. ("Global")



WHEREAS RobertTomjlenovic has financial contacts in the United States that are potential sources of capital for the Company in its ongoing operations, Global hereby enters into a limited consulting agreement whereby in return for arranging meetings and introductions, Tomjlenovic, on a case by case basis at the sole discretion of Global, will be compensated in the following manner:





Telephone expenses.



Travel expenses in the event that Tomjlenovic is required to accompany representatives of Global to meetings arranged by him.



Finders fees on verifiable capital contributions to the treasury of the Company, such fees to be set by the Board of Directors of Global on a case by case basis and in accordance with various regulatory requirements.



Undertakings



Tomilenovic undertakes to represent himself as an independent consultant and not an officer, director or employee of Global and will use only information fully disclosed to the public in informing potential investors of the Company of the merits of such an investment.



Agreed to this3rd day of October 2002 by:



/s/ Robert Tomjlenovic



Robert Tomjlenovic







/s/



Lindsay Semple

CEO - GLOBAL PRECISION MEDICAL
Case 1:07-cv-03439-WHP Document 20 Filed 10/02/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03439-WHP Document 20 Filed 10/02/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 1 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 2 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 3 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 4 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 5 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 6 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 7 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 8 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 9 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 10 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 11 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 12 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 13 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 14 of 15
Case 7:07-cv-03508-MDF Document 8 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 15 of 15
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/11/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03494-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/11/2007 Page 2 of 2
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

          - [File No. 500-1] 

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that the market for the securities of ConnectAJet.com, Inc. (“ConnectAJet”) may be reacting to manipulative forces or deceptive practices and that there is a lack of current and accurate information about ConnectAJet upon which an informed investment decision can be made. It also appears that there may be inaccurate assertions by ConnectAJet in publicly-disseminated press releases and on ConnectAJet's Web site about, among other things, the existence of the company's partnerships and affiliations with aviation companies. 

ConnectAJet was quoted on the Pink Sheet under the ticker symbol CAJT. Recently, there have been advertisements in newspapers and on television, information mailers, spam e-mails and a blast fax touting the company's shares. 

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company. 

Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT, October 1, 2007 through 11:59 p.m. EDT, on October 12, 2007. 

By the Commission. 

J. Lynn Taylor, 

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 07-4916 Filed 10-1-07; 11:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### PHILLIPS v. PHILLIPS

No. 46 PC.

Case below: 37 N.C. App. 388.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 4 October 1978.
#### WIMBISH v. AVIATION, INC.

No. 29 PC.

Case below: 12 N.C. App. 98.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 October 1971.
Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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.
 By:
    
    /s/ John B. Gerlach, Jr.

John B. Gerlach, Jr.Chief Executive OfficerMay 10, 2010By:
    
    /s/ John L. Boylan

John L. BoylanChief Financial OfficerMay 10, 2010
#### STATE v. WHITE

No. 90

Reported: 300 NC 494

Petition by defendant to rehear denied 16 September 1980.
Exhibit 23.1





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-168641, Form S-8 No. 333-158819, Form S-8 No. 333-150872, Form S-8 No. 333-129406, Form S-8 No. 333-135101 and Form S-8 No. 333-148848; Form S-8 No. 333-168641) pertaining to the Web.com Group, Inc. 2010 Inducement Award Plan,Web.com Group, Inc. 2009 Inducement Award Plan, 2008 Equity Incentive Plan, 1999 Equity Incentive Plan, Miscellaneous Stock Options Agreements, 2005 Equity Incentive Plan, 2005 Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan, 2005 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, Interland-Georgia 1999 Stock Plan, Interland 1995 Stock Option Plan, Interland 2001 Equity Incentive Plan, Interland 2002 Equity Incentive Plan, Interland 2005 Equity Incentive Plan and Web.com 2006 Equity Incentive Plan of Web.com Group, Inc.
of our reports dated March 14, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Web.com Group, Inc., and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Web.com Group, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Web.com Group, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2010.
  
 /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
 Jacksonville, Florida
 March 14, 2011
----

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,

| (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. |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                      |                                                                          |                               |
|-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|
|                                      | SKYE      INTERNATIONAL, INC.                                                 |
|                                      |                                                                          |                               |
| Date:   September      17, 2008 | By:                                                                 | /s/       Perry D.      Logan |
|                                      | Perry      D. Logan                                                           |
|                                      | Interim      Principal Executive and Interim Principal Financial      Officer |
#### STRANGE v. SINK

No. 95 PC.

Case below: 27 N.C. App. 113.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 2 December 1975.
#### Benjamin H. Chertok *vs.*Aroosiag H. Kassabian & another.

Suffolk.

March 17, 1926.

March 19, 1926.

Present: Rugg, C.J., Crosby, Pierce, Carroll, & Wait, JJ.

*Contract,*Performance and breach. *Tender.*

An agreement for the purchase of real estate providing for the payment of the purchase price “in cash” is not performed by the purchaser’s tendering a certified check of a third party accompanied by a refusal by the purchaser of .a request by the seller to get the check cashed.

Contract for $500, deposited as part of the purchase price of real estate to be sold by the defendant to the plaintiff. Writ in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston dated January 23, 1924.

Material facts found by the judge of the Municipal Court are described in the opinion. Having found for the defendants, he reported the action to the Appellate Division, who ordered the report dismissed. The plaintiff appealed.

The case was submitted on briefs.

*B. H. Chertok & W. M. Blatt,*for the plaintiff.

*J. E. Kelley & J. K. Tertzag,*for the defendants.

By the Court.

This is an action to recover a deposit made on account of the purchase price at the time of signing an agreement in writing whereby the plaintiff was to buy and the defendants to sell certain real estate. The evidence need not be narrated. Although conflicting, it justified the finding of the trial judge that “the plaintiff has never been able, ready and willing to carry out his agreement with the defendant.” This finding bars recovery. *Carpenter*v. *Holcomb,*105 Mass. 280, 284. *Sleeper*v. *Nicholson,*201 Mass. 110. Clearly the plaintiff did not offer to perform his part of the agreement according to its terms. The tender of a certified check of a third person accompanied by refusal by the plaintiff to get it cashed at the request of the defendants was not the equivalent of payment “in cash” *266required by the agreement. The doctrine of *Old Colony Trust Co.*v. *Chauncey,*214 Mass. 271, is inapplicable.

*Order dismissing report affirmed.*
<PAGE>



                                  Exhibit 32.2


  Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
                       of the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2001.

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


In connection with the Annual Report of Parentech, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Scott Landow, Chief
Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Dated:  July 16, 2004


                                    /s/ Scott Landow
                                    ---------------------------------------
                                    Scott Landow, Chief Accounting Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

ii .,.>.- !. 

I i 

L,.uL, 3: . --!I 

1: -~\ +,.1-,,2 :;ii,~,s;-): ,I i;. *i 2.. -I$--~I-o~ -- \! ! ' 

--.." ~.. ^."_.I.._ --- -' 

-_, 1'- -~.. 

.. 

IN RE: Fosamax Products Liability : 

Litigation 

1: 06-md-1789 (JFK) 

Order -------------------------------.--- X 

This Document Relates to: All Actions : 

--------.-----------------------.-- X 

JOHN F. KEENAN, United States District Judge: 

The Plaintiff's Steering Committee ("PSC") has 

requested an evidentiary hearing in advance of oral argument on 

the class certification motions that are currently pending before 

the Court. For the reasons discussed below, the PSC's request is 

DENIED. 

In determining whether to certify a class, a court must 

resolve any factual disputes relevant to each requirement of 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. In re Initial Public Offerinq 

Securities Litiqation, 471 F.3d 24, 41 (2d Cir. 2006). In 

connection with the instant class certification motion, the 

parties have created and the Court has reviewed an extensive 

evidentiary record. This record consists of the expert 

affidavits of plaintiff's dental experts, Robert E. Marx, D.D.S 

and Alistair N. Goss, D.D.Sc; plaintiff's claims administration 

expert Paul Mulholland, C.P.A., C.V.A.; defendant's medical 

expert, John Bilezikian, M.D.; defendant's expert Jeri W. Nieves, 

PH.D., an epidemiologist who specializes in osteoporosis; 

Case 1:07-cv-03461-JFK Document 13 Filed 10/31/2007 Page 1 of 2
defendant's oral and maxillofacial expert Robert S. Glickman, 

D.M.D.; and defendant's chemistry expert, Paul A. Bartlett. The 

parties have also submitted excerpts from the deposition 

transcripts of several of these experts; the interrogatory 

responses, deposition transcripts and plaintiff profile forms 

("PPF's") of the three putative class representatives, Mr. Trent 

Nichols, Jr., M.D., Ms. Aline Trahan, and Ms. Greta V. Murphy; an 

August 2004 post-marketing safety review from the FDA's Office of 

Drug Safety; and an FDA report showing the number of cases in 

which doctors reported adverse drug experiences associated with 

Fosamax in 1996. The parties have also brought to the Court's 

attention over forty articles and chapters from the oral and 

maxiilofacial, medical and dental scientific literature 

discussing osteonecrosis of the jaw ("ONJ") and its causes, 

diagnosis, treatment and relationship to oral bisphosphonates 

such as Fosamax. 

This record provides a sufficient factual basis to 

determine whether plaintiffs' motlons meet Rule 23's requirements 

and an evidentiary hearing will not be necessary. Accordingly, 

the PSC's request is denied. 

SO ORDERED. 

Dated: &2~Ccy~ 3 / ' G(? 7 

/ 

( JOHN F. KEENAN 

United States District Judge 

Case 1:07-cv-03461-JFK Document 13 Filed 10/31/2007 Page 2 of 2
---

---

Exhibit 14(a)

# Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors
ECtel Ltd.
Rosh Ha'ayin
Israel

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statement (No. 333-83736) on Form F-3 and Registration
Statement (No. 333-127576) on form S-8 of ECtel Ltd. of our report dated , May 16, 2007,
with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of ECtel Ltd. as of December 31, 2006 and
2005 and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholders
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
2006, which report appears in the December 31, 2006 Annual Report on form 20-F of ECtel
Ltd. and the reference to our firm under the heading Selected Financial Data
in the Annual Report.

Our report dated May 16, 2007 refers
to (a) a class action lawsuit that has been filed against the Company and (b) adoption of
the fair value method of accounting for stock-based compensation as required by Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment.

Somekh Chaikin
Certified Public Accountants (Israel)
A member firm of KPMG International

Tel Aviv, Israel

May 16, 2007



---

---
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-88,809-01

EX PARTE TRAVIS REED, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. C-3-W011247-1302271-A 

IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NUMBER 3

OF TARRANT COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of indecency with

a child by contact and sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment. The Second Court of Appeals

affirmed the conviction. Reed v. State, No. 02-14-00444-CR(Tex.App.—Fort Worth Aug. 31, 2016)

(not designated for publication). 

Applicant raises ten grounds alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel.

After a live hearing, the trial court signed findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that
2

relief be denied. 

This Court does not adopt the trial court’s findings and conclusions relating to Ground 8. 

Based on the trial court’s other findings of fact and conclusions of law, as well as this Court’s

independent review of the entire record, we deny relief.

Filed: July 3, 2019

Do not publish