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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Special Projects Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, July 8, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Antoinette Ross at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-4110.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Special Projects Committee will be held Thursday, July 8, 2021, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be made with Antoinette Ross. For more information please contact Antoinette Ross at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-4110, or write TAP Office, 1111 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or contact us at the website:                     *http://www.improveirs.org*. The agenda will include various IRS issues.                

Dated: June 4, 2021.

Kevin Brown,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2021-12095 Filed 6-8-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### Carl Anthony TERRY, Sr., Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 62338.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

April 27, 1993.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 25, 1993.

Application to Transfer Denied June 29, 1993.

Dave Hemingway, St. Louis, for mov-ant/appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Michael J. Spillane, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before AHRENS, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief. Movant pled guilty to failure to return to confinement in violation of § 575.220 RSMo 1986 and was sentenced pursuant to a plea agreement to five years’ imprisonment, to run consecutively to the sentences movant was currently serving.

The motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous, and no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order. ■

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
#### Thomas UMPHFREY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 41148.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 25, 1989.

Lance R. Drury, Public Defender, St. Joseph, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., John P. Pollard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SHANGLER, P.J., and TURNAGE and KENNEDY, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from denial of Rule 27.26 motion for post-conviction relief.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT 23.1



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 33-62336) pertaining to the E.W. Blanch Co. Retirement Plan, the
Registration (Form S-8 No. 33-78300) pertaining to the employee Stock Purchase
Plan of E.W. Blanch Holdings, Inc., the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-40441) pertaining to the 1993 Stock Incentive Plan, and the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-45261) pertaining to the Non-Employee Director's
Stock Plan, Director's Stock Option Plan, Executive Restricted Stock Incentive
Plan, 1997 Stock Incentive Plan, and Retirement Plan, of our report dated
January 15, 1998, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of E.W.
Blanch Holdings, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year
ended December 31, 1997.


                                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Minneapolis, Minnesota
May 4, 1998
#### Albert MORRIS, Claimant-Respondent, v. MURPHY COMPANY, Employer-Appellant.

No. 62402.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Feb. 16, 1993.

Deborah L. Hellmann, Riethmann & Valentine, St. Louis, for employer-appellant.

Morris B. Kessler, Kessler & Kessler, St. Louis, for claimant-respondent.

Before AHRENS, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

*523ORDER

PER CURIAM.

In this workers’ compensation case, employer appeals from the award by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) of future medical treatment to employee.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The Commission’s final award is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 78 (Monday, April 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 20120]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9959]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993-- Petroleum Environmental Research Forum Project 
No. 94-05

    Notice is hereby given that, on March 10, 1995, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), the Participants in the Petroleum 
Environmental Research Forum (``PERF'') Project No. 94-05, titled 
``Cooperative Air Program for Clean Air Act Amendments Compliance 
Research'', have filed written notification 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 identities of the parties are: Amoco Oil Company, 
Naperville, IL; BP Oil, Cleveland, OH; Chevron Research and Technology 
Company, Richmond, CA; Exxon Research and Engineering Company, Florham 
Park, NJ; Mobil Research and Development Corporation, Paulsboro, NJ; 
Phillips Petroleum Company, Bartlesville, OK; Texaco, Inc., Port 
Arthur, TX; and Shell Development Company, Houston, TX.
    The objective of this Program is to develop approaches, data, and 
technologies that lead to cost effective compliance with the Clean Air 
Act and its Amendments as applied to petroleum, petrochemical and 
chemical industry facilities. The activities to be carried out include 
the collection, exchange and analysis of research, development of basic 
engineering techniques, and systematic study of phenomena related to 
achieving these objectives.
    Participation in the Program remains open to interested persons and 
organizations until issuance of the final Project Report,which is 
presently anticipated to occur 36 months after the date of publication 
of this notice. PERF also intends to file additional written 
notifications disclosing all changes in membership of the Participants 
in the Program. Information regarding participation in the Program may 
be obtained from John King, Shell Development Company, Westhollow 
Technology Center EC-252, Houston, TX 77082-3101.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-9959 Filed 4-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-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**

|                                                  |                                                                                   |                                 |
|-------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| Dated: March                16, 2007   |                                                                                   | /s/                Daniel F. Collins |
|                                                  | Daniel                F. Collins, President and Chief Executive                Officer |

|                                       |                                                                                        |                                    |
|--------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| Dated:                March 16, 2007  |                                                                                   | /s/                Margaret R. Coughlin |
|                                       | Margaret                R. Coughlin, Secretary (Principal Financial                Officer) |

----
<PAGE>
 
                                 EXHIBIT 23.1
                         PEERLESS SYSTEMS CORPORATION

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Peerless Systems Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 000-21287) of our reports
dated March 5, 1999, except for the subsequent event described in Note 14, as to
which the date is April 6, 1999, on our audits of the financial statements and
financial statement schedule of Peerless Systems Corporation as of January 31,
1999 and 1998 and for the each of the three years in the period ended January
31, 1999, which reports are included in this 1999 Annual Report on Form 10-K.


PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP


Woodland Hills, California
April 22, 1999
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 BioForce Nanosciences Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kerry M. Frey, Chief Executive 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, 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 Company.





/s/ Kerry M. Frey

Kerry M. Frey

Chief Executive Officer

August 28, 2008







A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, 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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  The foregoing certifications are accompanying the Company's Form 10-QSB/A solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and are not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB/A or as a separate disclosure document.
H. R. 5640 

One Hundred Eighteenth 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 twenty-four 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 12804 

Chillicothe Road in Chesterland, Ohio, as the ‘‘Sgt. Wolfgang Kyle Weninger 

Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SGT. WOLFGANG KYLE WENINGER POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 12804 Chillicothe Road in Chesterland, Ohio, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sgt. Wolfgang Kyle Weninger 

Post Office Building’’. 

(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 ‘‘Sgt. Wolfgang Kyle Weninger Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David Rozell, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), rendered October 30, 1984, convicting him of bail jumping in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial (Feldman, J.), without a hearing, of the defendant’s motions to dismiss the indictment. By decision and order dated October 3, 1988, this court remitted the matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, to hear and report on those branches of the defen*733dant’s motions which were to dismiss the indictment on the ground of the denial of his State and Federal constitutional due process rights, and the appeal was held in abeyance in the interim *(see, People v Rozell,*143 AD2d 690). The Supreme Court, Kings County (Gomero, J.), has conducted a hearing and submitted its report to this court.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The denial by the Supreme Court, without a hearing, of those branches of the defendant’s motion which were to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds, pursuant to CPL 30.20 and 30.30, does not warrant reversal. "To the extent that [the defendant’s] motion * * * was based on the failure of the People to be ready for trial in conformity with the prescriptions of CPL 30.30, his plea of guilty operated as a waiver of his statutory right to any dismissal” *(People v Friscia,*51 NY2d 845, 847; *People v Wade,*139 AD2d 610). While the defendant’s speedy trial claim, pursuant to CPL 30.20 and the Federal Constitution survived his guilty plea *(see, People v Friscia, supra,*at 847), the motion papers submitted by the defendant *pro se*and his attorney failed to allege sufficient facts to warrant a hearing on this issue *(see,*CPL 210.45 [6]).

In addition, we agree with the determination by the Supreme Court that dismissal of the indictment is not warranted on due process grounds *(see, People v Best,*83 AD2d 881, *cert denied*455 US 926; *see also, People v Jackson,*142 AD2d 597; *Rayborn v Scully,*858 F2d 84, *cert denied*488 US 1032). As noted by the hearing court, almost all of the delay between the commission of the crime of bail jumping in 1976 and the indictment on that charge in 1983 was due to the defendant’s flight from New York to Wisconsin and his subsequent arrest under another name and flight from the Wisconsin authorities. Moreover, the defendant presented no evidence that any of the delay prejudiced his defense.

The defendant’s other contention raises an issue of law which is unpreserved for appellate review, and we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
#### Ronald M. CLARK, Appellant, v. David H. OLSON and Cynthia S. Olson, Respondents.

No. WD 42007.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Feb. 27, 1990.

Wesley B. Jennings, Kansas City, for appellant.

John C. Dods, Kansas City, for respondents.

Before GAIT AN, P.J., and CLARK and MANFORD, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Ronald Clark, appeals a jury verdict in favor of defendants. He alleged that respondents misrepresented the condition of a home sold to him.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Dismissed and Opinion Filed August 8, 2017 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-17-00576-CV 

TANYA TERRY-ANDRADE, Appellant 

V. 

JOSE DIAZ-SALAZAR, Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-16-04918 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Francis, and Justice Stoddart 

Opinion by Chief Justice Wright 

Tanya Terry-Andrade appealed the trial court’s February 7, 2017 judgment. On June 2, 

2017, the Dallas County Clerk informed us that appellant had not paid or made arrangements to 

pay for the fee. That same day, we sent appellant a letter, instructing her to file, within ten days, 

written verification that she had paid or made arrangements to pay the fee for the clerk’s record 

or written documentation that she had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. 

We cautioned appellant that the failure to comply might result in the dismissal of the appeal for 

want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). On June 13, 2017, appellant filed a docketing 

statement in which she states she did not file an affidavit of indigency. As of today, the clerk’s 

record has not been filed and appellant has not filed a response or otherwise communicated with 

the Court. 
 –2– 

In light of appellant’s failure to comply with this Court’s directive as detailed above, we 

dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c). 

170576F.P05 

 

/Carolyn Wright/ 

CAROLYN WRIGHT 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

TANYA TERRY-ANDRADE, Appellant 

No. 05-17-00576-CV V. 

JOSE DIAZ-SALAZAR, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 1, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-16-04918. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, 

Justices Francis and Stoddart participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. 

 It is ORDERED that appellee JOSE DIAZ-SALAZAR recover his costs, if any, of this 

appeal from appellant TANYA TERRY-ANDRADE. 

Judgment entered August 8, 2017.
EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Cole Credit Property Trust II, 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.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Cole Credit Property Trust II, Inc.Date: November 12, 2010
    By:
    /s/ D. Kirk McAllaster, Jr.Name:
    D. Kirk McAllaster, Jr.Title:
    Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial
Officer 
(Principal
Financial Officer)
<PAGE>

                            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 OC Financial, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert W. Hughes,
President and Chief Executive 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, 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:  May 16, 2005

/s/ Robert W. Hughes
--------------------
Robert W. Hughes
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       25