alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 19306]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10834]



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


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Toxicology Program; Availability of Technical Report on 
Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of Benzethonium Chloride

    The HHS' National Toxicology Program announces the availability of 
the NTP Technical Report on the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies 
of benzethonium chloride, which is used primarily in cosmetics for its 
antimicrobial and cationic surfactant properties.
    Toxicology and carcinogenicity studies were conducted by dermal 
administration of benzethonium chloride to groups of 60 F344/N rats and 
60 B6C3F<INF>1 mice of each sex at doses of 0, 0.15, 0.5, or 1.5 mg/kg 
body weight. Benzethonium chloride was administered to rats in ethanol 
5 days per week and doses were adjusted weekly according to the average 
body weights of the groups. As many as nine rats per group were 
evaluated after 15 months. Mice received doses administered in ethanol 
and dose volumes were adjusted weekly according to average body weights 
of the groups. As many as ten mice per group were evaluated after 15 
months of chemical administration.
    Under the conditions of these 2-year dermal studies, there was no 
evidence of carcinogenic activity <SUP>1 of benzethonium chloride in 
male or female F344 rats or in male or female B6C3F<INF>1 mice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The NTP uses five categories of evidence of carcinogenic 
activity observed in each animal study: two categories for positive 
results (``clear evidence'' and ``some evidence''), one category for 
uncertain findings (``equivocal evidence''), one category for no 
observable effect (``no evidence''), and one category for studies 
that cannot be evaluated because of major flaws (``inadequate 
study'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exposure of rats and mice to benzethonium chloride by dermal 
application in ethanol for 2 years resulted in epithelial hyperplasia 
in male and female rats and mice and sebaceous gland hyperplasia and 
ulcers in female rats at the site of application.
    Questions or comments about the Technical Report should be directed 
to Central Data Management at P.O. Box 12233, Research Triangle Park, 
NC 27709 or telephone (919) 541-3419.
    Copies of Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of Benzethonium 
Chloride (CAS No. 121-54-0) (TR-438) are available without charge from 
Central Data Management, NIEHS, MD E1-02, P.O. Box 12233, Research 
Triangle Park, NC 27709; telephone (919) 541-3419.

    Dated: April 12, 1996.
Kenneth Olden,
Director, National Toxicology Program.
[FR Doc. 96-10834 Filed 4-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 82 (Friday, April 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 18628]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10375]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration


National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health; 
Full Committee Meeting

    Notice is hereby given that the National Advisory Committee on 
Occupational Safety and Health (NACOSH), established under section 7(a) 
of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 656) to 
advise the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Health and Human 
services on matters relating to the administration of the Act, will 
meet on May 23, 1996, in Room N3437 A-D of the Department of Labor 
Building located at 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The 
meeting is open to the public and will begin at 9:00 a.m. lasting until 
approximately 4:00 p.m.
    Agenda items will include an overview of current activities, 
including a legislative update, of both the Occupational Safety and 
Health administration (OSHA) and the National Institute for Safety and 
Health (NIOSH). Other subjects will include the National Occupational 
Research Agenda (NORA), an update on OSHA's regulatory and enforcement 
activities, and workgroup reports. The committee will also discuss the 
members interests and develop plans for future meetings, under the 
direction of the recently appointed Chair, Dr. Kathleen M. Rest, 
University of Massachusetts Medical Center, who has joined the 
committee as a Public Representative.
    Written data, views or comments for consideration by the committee 
may be submitted, preferably with 20 copies, to Joanne Goodell at the 
address provided below. Any such submissions received prior to the 
meeting will be provided to the members of the Committee and will be 
included in the record of the meeting. Anyone wishing to make an oral 
presentation should notify Ms. Goodell before the meeting. The request 
should state the amount of time desired, the capacity in which the 
person will appear and a brief outline of the content of the 
presentation. Persons who request the opportunity to address the 
Advisory Committee may be allowed to speak to the extent time permits, 
at the discretion of the Chair of the Advisory Committee. Individuals 
with disabilities who need special accommodations should contact Tom 
Hall one week before the meeting at the address indicated below.
    An official record of the meeting will be available for public 
inspection in the OSHA Technical Data Center (TDC) located in Room 
N2625 of the Department of Labor Building (202-219-7500).
    For additional information contact: Joanne Goodell, Directorate of 
Policy, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N-3641, 200 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20210, telephone (202)219-8021, 
ext. 107.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 19th day of April, 1996.
Joseph A. Dear,
Assistant Secretary of Labor.
[FR Doc. 96-10375 Filed 4-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-M
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas October 13, 2022
No. 04-22-00492-CV IN THE INTEREST OF J.A.M., J.W.M., V.S.M., N.J.M., L.V.M., L.D.M., AND D.A.M.

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021-PA-01074 Honorable Kimberly Burley, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R In this accelerated appeal of the trial court’s order terminating Appellant’s parental rights, Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed an Anders brief. In the brief, counsel states that after a professional evaluation of the record, counsel finds no reversible error, concludes the appeal is without merit and frivolous, and counsel attached a motion to withdraw. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); In re R.R. , No. 04-03-00096-CV, 2003 WL 21157944, at *4 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 21, 2003, no pet.) (applying Anders procedure in a parental rights termination appeal). Counsel informed Appellant of his right to file a pro se brief and to request a free copy of the appellate record. Counsel provided Appellant with a form request for a free copy of the appellate record, and the form lacks only Appellant’s contact information, date, and signature. The State a letter waiving its right to file a responsive brief unless Appellant files a pro se brief. If Appellant desires to file a pro se brief, we order Appellant to do so within twenty days of the date of this order. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.6(a). If Appellant files a pro se brief, the State may file a responsive brief not later than twenty days after Appellant’s pro se brief is filed in this court. See id. R. 38.6(b). The motion to withdraw is held in abeyance pending further order of this court.It is so ORDERED on October 13, 2022.
PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:__________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, CLERK OF COURT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 3

- 0 317 TOWN OF KEVIN ,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. N ORTH CENTRAL MONTANA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER**
Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file Appellant’s reply brief and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is given an extension of time until March 1 5 , 2024 , to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 13 2024

02/13/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0317
---

---

Exhibit 13

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

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), each of the undersigned officers of Gilat
Satellite Networks Ltd., a company organized under the laws of the State of Israel (the
Company), does hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year
ended December 31, 2008 (the Form 20-F) of the Company 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 Annual Report on Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Amiram Levinberg
Amiram Levinberg
Chief Executive Officer
April 7, 2009
/s/ Ari Krashin
Ari Krashin
Chief Financial Officer
April 7, 2009



---

---
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 4277** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. RONALD ELZEY, a/k/a Duff , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Di strict of Maryland , at Baltimore
. William D. Quarles, Jr. , District Judge. ( 1:09

- cr - 00288

- WDQ

- 11 )

Submitted : August 19, 2011 Decided: August 29, 2011

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Marc G. Hall, HALL & CHO, P.C., Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Jonathan Biran, Appellate Chief, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER C URIAM: Ronald Elzey appeals his conviction and 262

- month sentence for one count of conspiracy to participate in a racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) (2006). His sole contention on appeal is that his 2003 Maryland conviction for r esisting arrest should not have been considered a predicate offense for a career offender sentencing enhancement pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4B1.1 (2009). Elzey’s argument is foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Jenkin s , 631 F.3d 680 (4th Cir. 2011). A three

- judge panel of this court may not overrule the precedent set by a prior panel. United States v. Rivers , 595 F.3d 558, 564 (4th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dana Williams, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), rendered March 20, 1984, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree and assault in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, the third and fourth counts of the indictment are dismissed, without prejudice to the People to re-present any appropriate charges to another Grand Jury *(see, People v Beslanovics,*57 NY2d 726), and a new trial is ordered with respect to the remaining counts.

Reversal of the defendant’s judgment of conviction is mandated by our prior holding, made on the appeal of the codefendant Vincent Dunlap, with whom the defendant was jointly tried, that the prosecutor’s summation was so highly inflammatory and prejudicial as to deprive the defendants of a fair trial *(see, People v Dunlap,*138 AD2d 393).

Because a new trial is required, we do not reach the defendant’s remaining contention. Mangano, P. J., Lawrence, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARK OERDING,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 10-35939

D.C. No. 3:08-cv-00633-PK

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Oregon

Ancer L. Haggerty, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 17, 2012** 

Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Tim Wilborn, the attorney of record for Mark Oerding and the real-party-ininterest, appeals from the district court’s judgment granting in part his motion for

FILED

JAN 26 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-35939

attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) based on a contingent-fee agreement with

Oerding. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of

discretion, Crawford v. Astrue, 586 F.3d 1142, 1147 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc), and

we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by reducing the fees from the

amount specified in the fee agreement based on the court’s assessment of what was

reasonable given the risk and complexity involved in this case. See Gisbrecht v.

Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 808 (2002) (stating that “[i]f the benefits are large in

comparison to the amount of time counsel spent on the case, a downward

adjustment is . . . in order”); Crawford, 586 F.3d at 1152-53 (explaining that courts

should assess the complexity and risk involved in the specific case at issue, rather

than social security cases in general, when analyzing the reasonableness of the

requested fees); see also Clark v. Astrue, 529 F.3d 1211, 1214 (9th Cir. 2008)

(“The district court abuses its discretion if it does not apply the correct legal

standard or rests its decision on a clearly erroneous finding of fact.”).

AFFIRMED.
NO. 07-05-0181-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL D

	MAY 23, 2005

	______________________________

	MELVYN L. ASKEW, 

									Appellant

	v.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

									Appellee

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 364TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

	NO. 2004-407,193; HON. BRADLEY S. UNDERWOOD, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

	Melvin L. Askew (appellant) appeals the denial of his motion to suppress.  We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

	The record fails to reflect that 1) a final judgment has been entered in this cause, or 2) sentence has been pronounced in open court.  Indeed, according to the docketing statement executed by appellant, he disclosed that the appeal is interlocutory.  Simply put, we do not have jurisdiction over an interlocutory order denying a motion to suppress evidence.  McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.–Fort Worth 1996, no pet.).

	Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.  

							Brian Quinn

							Chief Justice

Do not publish.
| 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Dimeco, 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; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   Date:  November 23, 2010 |   |   By: | /s/ Gary C. Beilman                    |
|------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------|----------------------------------------|
|                                           |   |            | Gary C. BeilmanChief Executive Officer |

----
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 Learning Quest Technologies, Inc. a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ending Sept. 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Ransford Sorensen, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my knowledge:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and



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







/s/ Ransford Sorensen

Ransford Sorensen

Chief Executive Officer

Chief Financial Officer

Date: November 9, 2005
Exhibit 32.1. and Exhibit 32.2 Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)   The undersigned, Anthony Brandon Escobar, Chief Executive Officer, and Anthony Coletti, Principal Accounting Officer, of Trafalgar Resources, Inc. (the "Registrant") do hereby 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 our knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period June 30, 2010 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):  (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 Registrant.  Dated:  August 13, 2010 By:  /s/ Anthony Brandon Escobar  Anthony Brandon Escobar  Chief Executive Officer  By:  /s/ Anthony Coletti Principal Accounting Officer  * A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Trafalgar Resources, Inc. and will be retained by Trafalgar Resources, Inc. and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

RONALD PRESSLEY, JR., ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D20-1038 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed September 30, 2020. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Michelle Sisco, Judge. PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, VILLANTI, and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7015

In Re: HARVEY P. SHORT,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (2:07-cv-00277; 2:07-cv-00409;

2:07-cv-00255)

Submitted: October 24, 2007 Decided: November 1, 2007

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harvey P. Short, Petitioner Pro Se.

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

PER CURIAM:

Harvey P. Short petitions for a writ of mandamus,

alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting in three 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) actions. Our review of the district court

docket sheets reveals that the district court held a status

conference on several of Short’s cases, including these three, on

October 4, 2007. Accordingly, because there has been recent

significant action in the district court, we deny the mandamus

petition as moot. We grant Short’s motion to proceed in forma

pauperis. 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 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Justin Pentelute, President and Chief Executive Officer of Wren, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge: (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78 o(d)); 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 14, 2008  /s/ Justin Pentelute Justin Pentelute President, Chief Executive Officer   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been furnished to Wren, Inc. and will be retained by Wren, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.