alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 34 (Wednesday, February 21, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 7901]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-766]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Aging, 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 contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel, Age, Gene-Environment Susceptibility--The Rejjavik Study II 
(Ages--RSII).
    Date: February 13, 2007
    Time: 9 a.m. to 10 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 
Wisconsin Avenue, 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20814, (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Alicja L. Markowska, PhD., DSC National 
Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, 7201 Wisconsin 
Avenue, Suite 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-9666, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#325f5340595d454153725c5b531c5c5b5a1c555d44"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e28f8390898d959183a28c8b83cc8c8b8acc858d94">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institues of Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 9, 2007.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-766 Filed 2-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Order filed, January 10, 2018

.

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

____________ NO. 01

- 17

- 00871

- CR

BILLY R. STRAHAN , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal f

rom the 184th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case 1484245



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due 12/29/2017

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1.
On 12/28/ 2017 , the reporter Phyllis Thibodeaux, filed volume 3 or 4 . The complete

reco rd has not been filed with the court. Because the complete reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Phyllis Thibodeaux , the official (or substitute) court reporter, to file the complete record in this appeal , within 30 day s of the date of this order

.No further extension will be entertained absent exceptional circumstances. The

trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. Se e Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). If the reporter does not timely file the record as ordered, we will issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to
determine the reason for the failure to file the record.

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 23.1 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS We have issued our report
dated February 4, 2003, accompanying the consolidated financial statements
and schedule included in the Annual Report of EFJ, Inc. and subsidiaries
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002. We hereby consent
to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements
of EFJ, Inc. and subsidiaries on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-48834,
effective October 27, 2000; File No. 333-48836, effective October 27,
2000; File No. 333-48840 effective October 27, 2000; File No. 333-48880,
effective October 27, 2000; and File No. 333-30673, effective July 2,
1997). /s/ GRANT THORNTON, LLP Minneapolis, Minnesota
February 4, 2003


---
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of BPZ Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I Randall D. Keys, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

 

(1)          The Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

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

 

 
| */s/ Randall D. Keys*   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Randall D. Keys         |
| Chief Financial Officer |
|                    |
| December 23, 2005  |   |

 

1

----
EASTERN RESOURCES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES



EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL
OFFICER

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 Eastern Resources,
Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Eric Altman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification
as of August 20, 2012.



|/s/Eric Altman                       | 
|------------------------------------ | 
|                                     | 
|Eric Altman, Chief Financial Officer | 
|(principal financial officer)        | 



A signed original of this written statement,
or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic
version of this written statement, has been provided to Loreto Resources Corporation, and will be retained by Loreto Resources
Corporation, and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-08-00071-CR

In re Timothy Ruffin

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 331ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 84,539, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Timothy Ruffin is serving the thirty-five year prison sentence imposed in 1987 after

he pleaded guilty to and was convicted of aggravated sexual assault. Ruffin appeals an order by

the district court denying his motion for post-conviction forensic DNA testing. In its order, the trial

court found, among other things, that Ruffin “has not established that any physical evidence relating

to this case and containing biological material currently exists.” See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann.

art. 64.03(a)(1)(A)(i) (West Supp. 2007).

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is

frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are

no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State,

573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);

Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137
2

(Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right

to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel’s

motion to withdraw is granted.

The order denying DNA testing is affirmed.

___________________________________________

Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Waldrop and Henson

Affirmed

Filed: August 6, 2008

Do Not Publish
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5437 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5437

To require the Secretary of the Treasury to establish a program for the 
    issuance of identity protection personal identification numbers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 9, 2018

  Mr. Paulsen (for himself and Ms. DelBene) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Secretary of the Treasury to establish a program for the 
    issuance of identity protection personal identification numbers.

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

SECTION 1. IDENTITY PROTECTION PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS.

    Not later than 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Secretary of the Treasury (or the Secretary's delegate) shall 
establish a program to issue, upon the request of any individual, a 
number which may be used in connection with such individual's Social 
Security number (or other identifying information with respect to such 
individual) to assist the Secretary in verifying such individual's 
identity.
                                 <all>
```
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

ROBERT LATTIMORE,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-58-RS-GRJ

PAIGE A. AUGUSTINE,

WARDEN, FCI MARIANNA,

Respondent.

_____________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On May 23, 2011, the Court ordered Petitioner to show cause before June 3,

2011, as to why this case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the Court’s

order to file three identical service copies of the Petition with the Court and to either pay

the filing fee or move for leave to proceed as a pauper. As of the date of this order,

Petitioner has failed to respond to the show cause order. 

Further, a review of the Federal Bureau of Prison’s inmate locator website

reflects that Petitioner was released from custody on April 29, 2011. Petitioner has not

yet filed a change of address with the Court despite his release from custody on April

29, 2011. Because Petitioner is no longer in custody, he has achieved all of the relief

which he requested in the Petition and to which he would have been entitled had this

Court granted his petition. The action is therefore moot unless there are collateral

consequences that arise from Petitioner’s conviction. Minor v. Dugger, 864 F.2d 124,

125 (11 Cir. 1989) (citations omitted). th

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed for

Case 5:11-cv-00058-RS-GRJ Document 7 Filed 07/08/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

failure to comply with an order of the Court and failure to prosecute. 

IN CHAMBERS, at Gainesville, Florida, this 8 day of July 2011.

th

s/Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party’s objections within 14 days after being

served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of

proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No: 5:11-cv-58-RS-GRJ

Case 5:11-cv-00058-RS-GRJ Document 7 Filed 07/08/11 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ALAN JAY WILSON,

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No. 4:11cv307-SPM/CAS

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

___________________________/

ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Unopposed

Application for Attorney’s Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (doc. 19). 

Defendant filed a response (doc. 20) advising that it does not object to the

requested award so long as it is subject to offset by the Department of Treasury. 

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s Unopposed Application for Attorney’s Fees under the

Equal Access to Justice Act (doc. 19) is granted.

2. The Commissioner is directed to pay Plaintiff or her assignee, Law

Offices of Harry J. Binder and Charles E. Binder, P.C., $2,797.75,

Case 4:11-cv-00307-SPM-CAS Document 21 Filed 05/31/12 Page 1 of 2
which are reasonable fees, and $350.00, which are costs for the

filing fee, under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412.

3. The United States Department of Treasury may apply the payment

to offset a debt owed by Plaintiff in accordance with Astrue v.

Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010).

DONE AND ORDERED this 31st day of May, 2012.

S/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Senior United States District Judge

2

Case 4:11-cv-00307-SPM-CAS Document 21 Filed 05/31/12 Page 2 of 2
# C_2010318EN.01000801.xml

| 23.11.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 318/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/8

---

Call for expression of interest for the Knowledge Support System

2010/C 318/07

Call for expressions of interest for the ESPON 2013 Knowledge Support System (KSS) is now open.

The call aims at enlarging the existing pool of experts supporting ESPON applied research, in particular in themes such the territorial dimensions of the EU2020 Strategy, territorial scenarios for Europe, territorial governance and territorial potentials related to the green economy.

The deadline for express interest in this Call is 21 January 2011.

All the documentation related to the call, including the procedure for applying, the eligibility rules, the evaluation criteria and the application form, is available at the ESPON website http://www.espon.eu

---
EXHIBIT 32.02


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Morgan Stanley Managed
Futures LV, L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christian
Angstadt, Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management LLC, the
general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2)	The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Partnership.









By:  /s/Christian Angstadt

Name:	   Christian Angstadt
Title:  Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management LLC,
		   the general partner of the Partnership

Date:   August 14, 2009
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5668 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5668

         For the relief of Mykhaylo Gnatyuk and Melnik Gnatyuk.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2018

Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         For the relief of Mykhaylo Gnatyuk and Melnik Gnatyuk.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR MYKHAYLO GNATYUK AND MELNIK 
              GNATYUK.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Mykhaylo Gnatyuk and Melnik 
Gnatyuk shall each be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for 
adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for 
permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of 
status to lawful permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Mykhaylo Gnatyuk or Melnik Gnatyuk 
enters the United States before the filing deadline specified in 
subsection (c), he or she shall be considered to have entered and 
remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for 
adjustment of status under section 245 of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act as of the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Mykhaylo Gnatyuk and Melnik 
Gnatyuk, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to 
reduce by 2, during the current or next following fiscal year, the 
total number of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of 
the country of the aliens' birth under section 203(a) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total number of 
immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the aliens' birth under section 202(e) of such Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Mykhaylo 
Gnatyuk and Melnik Gnatyuk shall not, by virtue of such relationship, 
be accorded any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and 
Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
ABRWH

TBD 6001 Work Group

Agenda

Cincinnati Airport Marriott Hotel

Teleconference Phone: 866-659-0537; Participant Code: 9933701

November 4, 2010

9:00 a.m. Welcome and introductions 

1. United Nuclear

2. Electromet 

3. Hooker Chemical

4. Baker Perkins and other sites under review

5. Action items

6. Administrative and calendar issues
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:01cr79-01/RV

MICHAEL DURANT

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Senior Judge Roger Vinson on February 11, 2009

Motion/Pleadings: MOTION TO REDUCE SENTENCE PUSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 

3582(c)(2) 

Filed by Defendant on 3/24/2008 Doc.# 117

RESPONSES:

 on Doc.# 

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

 s/Jerry Marbut

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Jerry Marbut

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 18th day of

 February , 2009, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b) The defendant’s sentencing guideline range is not affected by 

Amendment 706.

 /s/ Roger Vinson

ROGER VINSON

Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:01-cr-00079-RV-CJK Document 124 Filed 02/18/09 Page 1 of 1
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 11, 2009 

p0831 

Order 

 

September 11, 2009 

138835 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138835 

 COA: 290665 

Oakland CC: 2008-221161-FH 

MARTRELL DANIEL HOWARD, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 14, 2009 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1266

BART D. CEZAR,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

WILLIAM D. SMITH,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge.

(1:04-cv-03966-JFM)

Submitted: October 18, 2006 Decided: November 14, 2006

Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ernest P. Francis, ERNEST P. FRANCIS, LTD., Arlington, Virginia,

for Appellant. William D. Smith, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Bart D. Cezar appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his civil complaint alleging a violation of the Fair

Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (2000). We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm the district court’s order, which is modified to reflect

that Appellee’s motion to dismiss was converted into a motion for

summary judgment. See Cezar v. Smith, No. 1:04-cv-03966-JFM (D.

Md. Jan. 25, 2006). 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.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED