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

# ACTION:

Announcement of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the 24th meeting of the American Health Information Community Population Health and Clinical Care Connections Workgroup in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.).

# DATES:

March 5, 2008, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. [Eastern Time].

# ADDRESSES:

Mary C. Switzer Building (330 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20201), Conference Room 4090 (please bring photo ID for entry to a Federal building).

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

*http://www.hhs.gov/​healthit/​ahic/​population/​.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Workgroup will continue its discussion on how to facilitate the flow of reliable health information among population health and clinical care systems necessary to protect and improve the public's health.

                    The meeting will be available via Web cast. For additional information, go to:                     *http://www.hhs.gov/​healthit/​ahic/​population/​pop_​instruct.html.*

Dated: January 30, 2008.

Judith Sparrow, 

Director, American Health Information Community, Office of Programs and Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.

[FR Doc. 08-621 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4150-45-M
Exhibit 32.1

















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 Quarterly Report of Net Savings Link, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “report”), I, David Saltrelli, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated this 18th day of October, 2013.








DAVID SALTRELLIDavid SaltrelliChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit
32


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 Quarterly Report of BNH Inc. (the "Company") 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, Nehemya Hesin,
Chief  Executive and Financial Officer of
the  Company,  certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the Company.





Date: July 13, 2009
                
                /s/
      Nehemya HesinNehemya
      HesinChief
      Executive and Financial
Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2
                                                                    ------------


                    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 accompanying Form 10-KSB of ZAP for the year ended
December 31, 2004 (the "Report"), William R. Hartman, Chief Financial Officer of
ZAP, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:

(1)  such Form Type of ZAP for the year ended December 31, 2004,fully complies
     with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities
     Exchange of 1934; and

(2)  the information contained in such Form 10-KSB of ZAP for the year ended
     December 31, 2004,fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
     condition and results of operations of ZAP.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, another
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to ZAP and will be retained by ZAP
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.


/s/ William R. Hartman
-----------------------
William R. Hartman
Chief Financial Officer
March 30, 2005
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

      ( print page 7592)    
                    Notice is hereby given that, on November 15, 2007, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), NanoCable ATP Project No. 70NANB7H7043 has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.                

Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identifies of the parties to the venture are: NanoRidge Materials, Inc., Houston, TX; and The Boeing Company, Huntington Beach, CA. The general area of planned activity for NanoCable ATP Project No. 70NANB7H7043 is to develop a lightweight electrically conductive wire/cable utilizing conductive carbon nanotubes embedded in a polymer matrix.

The activities of this venture project will be partially funded by an award from the Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.

Patricia A. Brink,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 08-559  Filed 2-7-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE  4410-11-M
AGENDA

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health Teleconference of the 

Subcommittee for Procedure Reviews (SPR)

February 15, 2022 

Conference Call Number: 1-866-659-0537; Participant Passcode: 9933701

11:00 a.m. (Eastern Time) Welcome and roll-call/introductions 

Carry over items from Feb. 13, 2019, Feb. 18, 2021 & Nov. 3, 2021 SPR meetings: 

1. ORAUT-OTIB-0006 

2. OTIB-0011 

3. OTIB-0001 

4. ORAUT-TKBS-0060 

5. DCAS-PER-087 

6. OTIB- 0088 

7. ORAUT-OTIB-0049 

Newly-issued SC&A reviews: 

1. Battelle-TIB-5000 “Default Assumptions and Methods for Atomic Weapons Employer Dose 

Reconstructions” 

2. DCAS-PER-045, Subtask 4 “Aliquippa Forge TBD Revision” case review

3. DCAS-PER-052, Subtask 4 “Westinghouse Nuclear Fuels Division” case reviews 

4. DCAS-PER-059, Subtask 4 “Norton Company” case review 

5. DCAS-PER-062, Subtask 4 “ORAUT-OTIB-0052 Parameters to Consider When Processing 

Claims for Construction Trade Workers” case review

Preparation for April 2022 Full ABRWH Meeting: Review of technical guidance documents ready for full 

Board approval 

Newly-Issued Guidance Documents and Supplemental topics

Next WG Meeting/Plans 

3:30 p.m. Adjourn
#### Eugean Smith, *et al. v.*Holloway Construction Co.

(No. 15158)

Decided March 26, 1982.

*Masters & Taylor*and *Barbara J. Keefer*for appellants.

*Jackson, Kelly, Holt*& *O’Farrell*and *Stephen R. Crislip*for appellee.

Per Curiam:

This is an appeal by the appellants, Mr. and Mrs. Eugean Smith, from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Kanawha County in their action against the appellee, Holloway Construction Company, for damages allegedly caused their house by the Company’s blasting. In the *723course of the trial, the company made a motion *in limine*to exclude from the jury’s consideration evidence of damages the blasting allegedly caused other buildings in the area. The trial court granted the motion. Even though the appellants did not object, they contend that the granting of the motion constituted error. After examining the record, we conclude that the appellants did not preserve the point for appellate review and we affirm.

This case arises out of blasting conducted by the appellee while building an interstate highway. In the course of blasting, cracks appeared in the foundation and walls of the appellants’ home. After the appearance of the cracks, the appellants filed suit against the company for damages. At a pretrial conference, conducted on April 1, 1980, the company made a motion *in limine*to prevent the appellants from offering evidence of damages allegedly caused other structures by the appellee’s blasting. The trial court did not rule upon the motion at that time. The company renewed its motion *in limine*just prior to trial and the judge granted it. The appellants did not object to the lower court’s ruling. The appellants contend here that, by its very nature, a motion *in limine*does not require an objection to preserve it as error for appeal.

Our general rule regarding the necessity to object to preserve error for appeal is set forth in Syllabus Point 7 of *Wheeling Dollar Savings and Trust v. Leedy,*158 W. Va. 926, 216 S.E.2d 560 (1975) as follows:

> “[W]here objections were not shown to have been made in the trial court, and the matters concerned were not jurisdictional in character, such objections will not be considered upon appeal.”

*See, State Road Commission v. Ferguson,*148 W.Va. 742, 137 S.E.2d 206 (1964). Clearly, the motion *in limine*did not relate to a jurisdictional matter. It was made for the purpose of excluding testimony concerning damages allegedly done other structures in the area by the appellees blasting operations. At most, it went to the admissibility of the evidence. As such, the matter was not jurisdictional *724and, in the absence of an objection, was not preserved for appeal.

In addition, we note that despite the affirmative ruling on the motion *in limine,*the appellant still managed to present at least some of his desired testimony when, on cross-examination, two of his witnesses stated that their homes had been damaged by the appellee’s blasting operations.

The appellant’s contentions are without merit. The decision of the Circuit Court of Kanawha County is, therefore, affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                SUBSIDIARIES OF MODEM MEDIA . POPPE TYSON, INC.

                              as of March 10, 2000

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         Percentage of
                                                                       Voting Securities
                                                                       Owned Directly or
                                                     Jurisdiction of     Indirectly by
     Subsidiary Name                                 Incorporation        Modem Media
     ---------------                                 ---------------   -----------------

     <C>                                             <S>               <C>
     Modem Media, Inc. .............................    California            100%
     Modem Media Holdings LLC.......................    Delaware              100%
     Modem Media Holding Inc. ......................    Delaware              100%
     CentrPort, LLC.................................    Delaware             50.5%
     Modem Media . Poppe Tyson (Hong Kong) Limited..    Hong Kong             100%
     Modem Media Japan, KK..........................    Japan                 100%
     Modem Media (UK) Limited.......................    UK                    100%
     Modem Media Germany Holding GmbH...............    Germany               100%
     Modem Media MEx GmbH...........................    Germany               100%
     Modem Media France SAS.........................    France                100%
     Modem Media . Poppe Tyson, Inc. ...............    Canada                100%
     Modem Media Singapore Pte Ltd..................    Singapore             100%
     Modem Media . Poppe Tyson do Brasil Ltda.......    Brazil                100%
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 on Form 10-Q of H&H Imports, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on his knowledge:

(1)

the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 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.



Date: August 23, 2011

| |                                                      
| | -----------------------------------------------------
| |                                                      
| |                                                      
| | /s/ STEVEN ROGAI                                     
| | Steven Rogai                                         
| | Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
302 CERTIFICATION

I, Betty Soumekh, certify that:

         1. I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Excel
Global, Inc.;

         2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
the period covered by this report;

         3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in
this report;

         4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
12a-14) and internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and
have:

      a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

      b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing
date of this report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c)  presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

         5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board
of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

         a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which
are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal controls over financial reporting.

Date: August 18, 2008               /s/Betty Soumekh
                                   ----------------------------
                                   Betty Soumekh
                                   Chief Executive Officer
                                   Chief Financial Officer
Order entered March 26, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01411-CR

No. 05-12-01414-CR

MURRELL NORMAN MUCK, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 366-81548-2011, 366-81549-2011

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeals. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is 

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which 

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

The appeals are ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeals shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are 

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7490

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

IVAN JULIAN STEVENSON, a/k/a Issac, a/k/a Ike,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.

(CR-93-30025-3, CA-01-495-7)

Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 20, 2001

Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ivan Julian Stevenson, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Paul Crouch, Jr.,

United States Attorney, Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr., Assistant

United States Attorney, Ruth Elizabeth Plagenhoef, Assistant United

States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Ivan Julian Stevenson seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West

Supp. 2001) and denying his motion to alter or amend judgment. We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See United States v. Stevenson, Nos. CR-93-

30025-3; CA-01-495-7 (W.D. Va. July 9, 2001; Aug. 7, 2001). 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.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of GigOptix, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:

1) the Companys Form 10-Q for the three months ended July 4, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2) the information contained in
the Companys Form 10-Q for the three months ended July 4, 2010 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/    Ronald K. Shelton             
|Ronald K. Shelton                    
|Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

Dated: August
2, 2010
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5737 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5737

                     One Hundred Fifteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
108 West D Street in Alpha, Illinois, as the ``Captain Joshua E. Steele 
                             Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CAPTAIN JOSHUA E. STEELE POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 108 West D Street in Alpha, Illinois, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Captain Joshua E. Steele Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Captain 
Joshua E. Steele Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```