alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 110 (Thursday, June 6, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 28890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14128]



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

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION AGENCY

Agency for International Development


Notice of Public Information Collections Submitted to OMB for 
Review

SUMMARY: U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has 
submitted the following information collection to OMB for review and 
clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Comments regarding 
this information collection are best assured of having their full 
effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Comments should 
be addressed to: Desk Officer for USAID, Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, 
D.C. 20503. Copies of submission may be obtained by calling (202) 736-
4743.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Number: 0412-0004.
    Form Number: USAID 11.
    Title: Application for Approval of Commodity Eligibility.

    Summary: USAID provides loans and grants to some developing 
countries in the form of Commodity Import Programs (CIPS). These funds 
are made available to host countries to be allocated to the public and 
private sectors for purchasing various commodities from the U.S., or in 
some cases, from other developing countries. In accordance with Section 
604(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, USAID may 
finance only those commodities which are determined eligible and 
suitable in accordance with various statutory requirements and agency 
policies. Using the Application for Approval of Commodity Eligibility 
(Form USAID 11), the supplier certifies to USAID information about the 
commodities being supplied, as required in section 604(f), so that AID 
may determine eligibility.
    Description of Respondents: Business or other for profit.
    Number of respondents: 365 (twice a year).
    Average hours per response: half hour (\1/2\ hour).
    Total Annual Responses: 730.

    Dated: May 28, 1996.
Genease E. Pettigrew,
Chief, Information Support Services Division, Office of Administrative 
Services, Bureau of Management.
[FR Doc. 96-14128 Filed 6-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116-01-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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Regal Rock, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended February 28, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in
the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to his 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.


Date:  April 16, 2007


/s/ Albert Au
-------------------------------------------
Albert Au, President and C.E.O.
(Principal Executive Officer)
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 114TH DISTRICT COURT OF SMITH COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 2nd

day of September, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

BRANDEE MICHELLE NICHOLS, Appellant

NO. 12-14-00287-CR; Trial Court No. 114-0561-14

Opinion by Brian Hoyle, Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the appellate record and the briefs filed herein; and 

the same being inspected, it is the opinion of the Court that the trial court’s judgment below 

should be modified and, as modified, affirmed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the trial court’s judgment 

below be modified to reflect that Appellant pleaded “true” to enhancement paragraphs one and 

two, the trial court found enhancement paragraphs one and two “true,” and the plea on the 

jurisdictional paragraph was “none” and as modified, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed; and 

that this decision be certified to the trial court below for observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court of 

Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of 

Tyler, this the 27th day of October 2015.

PAM ESTES, CLERK

By: _______________________________

Chief Deputy Clerk
#### Steve MORGAN, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.

No. 56090.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Nov. 21, 1989.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Jan. 11, 1990.

Application to Transfer Denied Feb. 13, 1990.

Dave Hemingway, St. Louis, for movant-appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Robert V. Franson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent-respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT 32

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


         In  connection  with the Quarterly  Diamond  Ranch Foods,  Ltd, on Form
10-QSB for the quarter  ending June 30,  2006 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"), the undersigned,  William
DeMarzo,  Chief  Financial  Officer  and  Principal  Accounting  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 to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         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.

Date: August 21, 2006


By:    /s/ William DeMarzo
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
       William DeMarzo, Chief Financial Officer

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.
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                      Exhibit 21

                                   ATMI, INC.
                                  SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
           ENTITY                                              STATE OR JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION OR ORGANIZATION
----------------------------------------------------           ------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                            <C>
Advanced Technology Materials, Inc.                            Delaware
Epitronics Corporation                                         Delaware
ATMI Ecosys Corporation                                        California
Advanced Delivery & Chemical Systems Nevada, Inc.              Nevada
Advanced Delivery & Chemical Systems Holdings, LLC             Delaware
Advanced Delivery & Chemical Systems Operating, LLC            Delaware
Advanced Delivery & Chemical Systems Manager, Inc.             Delaware
ATMI Materials, Ltd.                                           Texas
ATMI Korea Co. Ltd.                                            Korea
ATMI UK Limited                                                Scotland
ATMI Packaging, Inc.                                           Minnesota
ATMI International Holdings, Inc.                              Delaware
ATMI Taiwan Holdings, Inc.                                     Delaware
ATMI Belgium Holdings, Inc.                                    Delaware
ATMI Belgium, LLC                                              Delaware
ATMI Packaging N.V.                                            Belgium
ATMI International Trading Co. Ltd.                            China
ATMI Japan KK                                                  Japan
ATMI Taiwan Co. Ltd.                                           Taiwan
ATMI GmbH                                                      Germany
ATMI PTE Ltd                                                   Singapore
ATMI Fab Services Ireland, Ltd                                 Ireland
ATMI Acquisition BVBA                                          Belgium
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 28582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14228]



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

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Notice of Agency Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the ``Government in the Sunshine 
Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 3:00 p.m. on 
Tuesday, May 28, 1996, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider the following 
matters:
    Matters relating to the Corporation's corporate and supervisory 
activities.
    Matters relating to the probable failure of an insured depository 
institution.
    Personnel matters.
    In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Vice 
Chairman Andrew C. Hove, Jr., seconded by Director Joseph H. Neely 
(Appointive), concurred in by Director Jonathan L. Fiechter (Acting 
Director, Office of Thrift Supervision), Ms. Julie Williams, acting in 
the place and stead of Director Eugene A. Ludwig (Comptroller of the 
Currency), and Chairman Ricki Helfer, that Corporation business 
required its consideration of the matters on less than seven days' 
notice to the public; that no earlier notice of the meeting was 
practicable; that the public interest did not require consideration of 
the matters in a meeting open to public observation; and that the 
matters could be considered in a closed meeting by authority of 
subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(8)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), 
and (c)(10) of the ``Government in the Sunshine Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b 
(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), and--
(c)(10)).
    The meeting was held in the Board Room of the FDIC Building located 
at 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC.

    Dated: May 29, 1996.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Valerie J. Best,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-14228 Filed 6-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-M
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

OF BLUEBIRD EXPLORATION COMPANY

I, Mark Fingarson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q, as amended, of Bluebird Exploration Company;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) 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 quarterly 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 quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and

 

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

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and 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 equivalent functions):

 

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; 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; and,

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material                weaknesses.

| Date: December 1, 2008 | /s/ Mark Fingarson |
|------------------------|--------------------|

|   | Mark Fingarson |
|--------|----------------|

|   | President and Chief Executive Officer, and principal financial officer |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ELIZABETH A. STRANGE

First Assistant United States Attorney

District of Arizona

ANNA R. WRIGHT

Assistant U.S. Attorney

United States Courthouse

405 W. Congress Street, Suite 4800

Tucson, Arizona 85701

Telephone: 520-620-7300

Email: anna.wright@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

 Plaintiff, vs. 

Scott Daniel Warren,

Defendant.

18-mj-01455-N/A-BPV

MOTION FOR STATUS 

CONFERENCE

The United States of America, by and through its attorneys undersigned, 

respectfully requests that the Court set a status conference in this matter two days prior to 

the Video Deposition currently scheduled for Friday, February 9, 2018, for the following 

reasons. 

The plea offer extended in this case requires that a change of plea hearing be 

conducted two days before the Video Deposition. As such, the government requests a 

status conference two days prior to the Video Deposition in order to: (1) confirm that the 

Video Deposition will proceed on the currently scheduled date and that the defense will 

not be seeking a continuance of the Video Deposition, (2) resolve any outstanding 

discovery disputes and/or potential evidentiary issues that could arise at the Video 

Deposition, and (3) make a record that the defendant has been advised of the [pre-

//

Case 4:18-cr-00223-RCC-DTF Document 13 Filed 01/23/18 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

indictment] plea offer in this case and has rejected that plea offer; or, alternatively, conduct 

a change a plea hearing if the defendant decides to accept the government’s plea offer. 

Respectfully submitted this 23rd day of January, 2018.

ELIZABETH A. STRANGE

First Assistant United States Attorney District of Arizona

s/Anna R. Wright

ANNA R. WRIGHT

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Copy of the foregoing served electronically or 

by other means this 23rd day of January, 2018, to:

William G. Walker, Esq.

Michael Areinoff, Esq.

Case 4:18-cr-00223-RCC-DTF Document 13 Filed 01/23/18 Page 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Oscar Johnson, Defendant.

County Court, Kings County,

September 21, 1956.

*918
      *Edward S. Silver, District Attorney (Joseph Hoey*of counsel), for plaintiff.

*Leo Healy*for defendant.

Hyman Barshay, J.

The district attorney moves for an order directing that the defendant be tried before a special panel pursuant to the provisions of section 749-aa of article 18-B of the Judiciary Law. The defendant, a clerk of the County Court, Kings County, was indicted in several counts for violation of sections 372 and 1826 o'f the Penal Law. The affidavit of the district attorney submitted in support of this motion sets forth in detail, cogent reasons for this application. In this respect, the moving affidavit differs from affidavits heretofore submitted in similar applications in other matters. In those applications which resulted in a denial of the motion, they were mere conclnsory statements unsupported by facts *(People*v. *Tkacsik,*N. Y. L. J., Aug. 8, 1956, p. 6, col. 4). I have read the grand jury minutes when a motion for inspection was made and denied, and I am of the belief that this will be a protracted trial consuming about four weeks. Petit jurors in Kings County usually serve two weeks and are reluctant to serve beyond that period. While the choice to do so is not theirs, nevertheless, due consideration should be given to their need to return to their business or their work. The impaneling of a jury may in itself consume several days.

Questions of law will arise in this case which are usually not present in the ordinary criminal trial. The motion is, therefore, granted. Submit order providing for the drawing of 200 talesmen to be present in part V of this court on October 8, 1956.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 477 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 477

    Directing the Secretary of Defense to transmit to the House of 
Representatives the fiscal year 2010 30-year shipbuilding plan relating 
to the long-term shipbuilding strategy of the Department of Defense, as 
        required by section 231 of title 10, United States Code.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2009

   Mr. Forbes (for himself, Mr. Wittman, Mr. Bartlett, Mr. Miller of 
 Florida, Mr. Akin, Mr. Kline of Minnesota, Mr. Franks of Arizona, Mr. 
 Bishop of Utah, and Mr. Lamborn) submitted the following resolution; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Directing the Secretary of Defense to transmit to the House of 
Representatives the fiscal year 2010 30-year shipbuilding plan relating 
to the long-term shipbuilding strategy of the Department of Defense, as 
        required by section 231 of title 10, United States Code.

    Resolved, That the Secretary of Defense is directed to transmit to 
the House of Representatives, not later than 14 days after the date of 
the adoption of this resolution, all documents, including telephone and 
electronic mail records, logs and calendars, and records of internal 
discussions in the possession of the Secretary and produced by the 
Secretary of the Navy or the Director of the Office of Management and 
Budget relating to the following:
            (1) The fiscal year 2010 30-year shipbuilding plan relating 
        to the long-term shipbuilding strategy of the Department of 
        Defense, as required by section 231 of title 10, United States 
        Code.
            (2) The certification statement of the Secretary required 
        in the plan that both the budget for this fiscal year and the 
        future-years defense program relating to the construction of 
        naval vessels are at a level that is sufficient for the 
        procurement as described in the 30-year shipbuilding plan.
                                 <all>
```
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Willie F Williams, Jr., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company, 

Defendant. 

No. CV-18-00061-TUC-DCB 

ORDER 

The Court finding good cause to refer this matter to a settlement conference, 

IT IS ORDERED that this matter is set for a SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 

before the Honorable Bruce G. Macdonald on Tuesday, September 24, 2019, at 9:30 

a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall personally attend the 

settlement conference or have a representative, having settlement authority present for 

purposes of the settlement conference. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all further directives related to the settlement 

conference shall be provided by the Magistrate Judge. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Stipulated Motion for Extension of 

Pretrial Deadlines (Doc. 51) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the event the case is not settled, the Court 

grants a three month extension of time as follows: 1) completion of all discovery, 

including expert discovery, extended to December 15, 2019; 2) Dispositive motions due 
- 2 -

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

by January 15, 2020, and 3) the Joint Proposed Pretrial Order due 30 days following the 

Court’s ruling on dispositive motions. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THERE SHALL BE NO FURTHER 

EXTENSIONS OF TIME FOR COMPLETING DISCOVERY.

Dated this 21st day of August, 2019.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our reports datedFebruary 22, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements, schedule and internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of DDi Corp. and subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of DDi Corp. and subsidiaries on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-112853, effective February 13, 2004, 333-116418, effective June 14, 2004,333-128656, effective September 28, 2005, and 333-147210, effective November 7, 2007). 

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP 

Irvine, California 

February 22, 2011