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.                  

###### Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries

# AGENCY:

Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The Executive Director of the Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries gives notice of a closed meeting of the Advisory Committee on Actuarial Examinations. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on October 27, 2008, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at Mercer, 1717 Arch Street, 27th Floor, Philadelphia, PA. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patrick W. McDonough, Executive Director of the Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries, 202-622-8225. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that the Advisory Committee on Actuarial Examinations will meet at Mercer, 1717 Arch Street, 27th Floor, Philadelphia, PA on Friday, October 27, 2008, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss questions that may be recommended for inclusion on future Joint Board examinations in actuarial mathematics, pension law and methodology referred to in 29 U.S.C. 1242(a)(1)(B). 

A determination has been made as required by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that the subject of the meeting falls within the exception to the open meeting requirement set forth in Title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B), and that the public interest requires that such meeting be closed to public participation. 

Dated: September 16, 2008. 

Patrick W. McDonough, 

Executive Director, Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries.

[FR Doc. E8-22385 Filed 9-23-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

PUBLIC COMPANY ACCOUNTING REFORM AND INVESTOR PROTECTION ACT OF 2002

 

 

In connection with the periodic report of California Bancorp (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2019, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Thomas A. Sa, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that:

 

 (1)      the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.

 

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

 

Dated: April 14, 2020

 

|                                                             |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
| /s/ Thomas A. Sa                                            |
| Thomas A. Sa                                                |
| Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

-108-
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1443

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the Secretary of

the Treasury to disclose taxpayer identity information through mass

communications to notify persons entitled to tax refunds.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 4, 2001

Mr. DOGGETT (for himself, Mr. STARK, Mr. MATSUI, Mr. CARDIN, Mr.

MCDERMOTT, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts, Mr.

TANNER, Mrs. THURMAN, Mr. POMEROY, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. HOLT, Mr.

SHERMAN, Mr. CAPUANO, and Mr. ETHERIDGE) introduced the following

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the

Secretary of the Treasury to disclose taxpayer identity

information through mass communications to notify persons entitled to tax refunds.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘ IRS Refund Accessi5 bility Act of 2001’’.
2

•HR 1443 IH

1 SEC. 2. DISCLOSURE OF TAXPAYER IDENTITY FOR TAX RE2 FUND PURPOSES.

3 Paragraph (1) of section 6103(m) of the Internal

4 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to disclosure of taxpayer

5 identity information for tax refunds) is amended by insert6 ing ‘‘, and through any other means of mass communica7 tion,’’ after ‘‘media’’.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1385 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1385

                      For the relief of Gao Zhan.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 3, 2001

   Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                      For the relief of Gao Zhan.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    The Congress finds as follows:
            (1) Gao Zhan, a noted sociologist and adjunct professor at 
        American University, is an immigrant lawfully admitted for 
        permanent residence in the United States.
            (2) She is an accomplished academician who has studied 
        women's issues and China-Taiwan relations.
            (3) On February 11, 2001, Gao Zhan, her husband, Xue 
        Donghua, and her son, Andrew Xue, were detained by Chinese 
        authorities at the airport in Beijing.
            (4) Xue Donghua was later released, and since then the 
        couple has been apart.
            (5) Andrew Xue, who is a United States citizen, was taken 
        away from his parents and put in a Beijing kindergarten for 25 
        days, which adversely affected him.
            (6) Xue Donghua has taken an oath of citizenship to become 
        a United States citizen.
            (7) Gao Zhan is a highly respected member of her community 
        in the United States, has lived in this country since 1989, and 
        would make a wonderful citizen of the United States.

SEC. 2. NATURALIZATION OF GAO ZHAN.

    Notwithstanding section 337(a) or any other provision of title III 
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), Gao 
Zhan shall be considered to be a naturalized citizen of the United 
States as of the date of the enactment of this Act and shall be 
furnished by the Attorney General with a certificate of naturalization.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Robert McCluskey

v. Civil No. 05-cv-052-JD

Prime Care Medical, Inc., et al.

ORDER OF RECUSAL

I hereby recuse myself from this case. 

SO ORDERED.

__________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: June 17, 2005

cc: Kenneth C. Bartholomew, Esq.

 Steven E. Hengen, Esq.

 Jonathan A. Lax, Esq.

 Maureen Raiche Manning, Esq.

 Peter W. Mosseau, Esq.

 Lawrence A. Vogelman, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00052-JD Document 21 Filed 06/17/05 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 99

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  OF EMPIRE FEDERAL BANCORP, INC.  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 Empire Bank (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, William H. Ruegamer, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Linda M. Alkire, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer, of Empire Bank, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|November 14, 2002                                                               |  |                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|s/sWILLIAM H. RUEGAMERWilliam H. Ruegamer President and Chief Executive Officer |  | s/sLINDA M. ALKIRELinda M. Alkire Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

---

QuickLinks
# STATEOFLOUISIANA

COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT

JAMES HOWARD COBB, II AND MARLA SCHAFFER COBB, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF THEIR DECEASED MINOR SON, JAMES BURKE COBB, AND ON BEHALF OF THEIR MINOR CHILDREN, SCHAFFER LEE COBB AND DALLAS CASON COBB NO. 2023 CW 0128

VERSUS ASCENSION PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, PATRICE PUJOL, DUTCHTOWN HIGH SCHOOL, EDITH WALKER, RONNIE HARPER, COACH BENNY SAIA, COACH PATRICK HILL AND ABC INSURANCE COMPANY 

### APRIL 19, 2023

In Re: Ascension Parish School Board, applying for

supervisory writs, 23rd Judicial Parish ofAscension, No. 106435.
BEFORE: McCLENDON, WOLFE, AND GREENE, JJ.

WRIT DENIED.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT FOR THE COURT PMC EW HG District Court,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Walter Norton

v. Case No. 06-cv-282-JD

United States of America

O R D E R

Pursuant to Rule 8(c) of the Civil Rules of Federal Procedure governing Section 2255

Proceedings, if an evidentiary hearing is warranted as to a 2255 petition, the judge must appoint an

attorney to represent the moving party who qualifies to have counsel appointed under 18 U.S.C. §

3006A. Mr. Norton was granted In Forma Pauperis status on October 24, 2006 as to the filing of his

appeal. 

Therefore, the Court herewith orders an attorney be appointed to represent Mr. Norton. An

evidentiary hearing will thereafter be scheduled.

SO ORDERED.

July 23, 2007 /s/ Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr._____

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

cc: Walter Norton, pro se

Aixa Maldonado-Quinones, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00282-JD Document 23 Filed 07/23/07 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
ACCOMPANYING  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
                      
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         1,437
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,516
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               10,383
<PP&E>                                         115,068
<DEPRECIATION>                                 3,946
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 203,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          17,951
<BONDS>                                        95,729
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       96
<OTHER-SE>                                     66,318
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   203,791
<SALES>                                        32,855
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               35,549
<CGS>                                          18,278
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  31,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,858
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                4,135
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,503)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            2,632
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,632
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.27
        


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

IMS Health Incorporated, et al.

v. Case No. 06-cv-280-PB

New Hampshire Attorney General

O R D E R

 Effective October 1, 2005, Electronic Filing became mandatory in all cases in this

district. In the order granting his pro hac vice admission dated December 20, 2006, Attorney

Craig Becker was notified that his admission was contingent on registering for ECF within 10

days. On January 17, 2007, the clerk’s office made a courtesy telephone call to Attorney

Becker’s office to inform him that his ECF registration was past due and to request he

immediately register for ECF. As of this date, Attorney Becker has not registered for ECF. 

Attorney Becker shall register for ECF on or before February 8, 2007. If Attorney Becker

fails to register within this time frame, the court will immediately revoke his pro hac admission

status and will remove him as counsel of record in the case without further order of the court.

SO ORDERED.

Date: February 1, 2007 /s/ Paul Barbadoro 

 Paul J. Barbadoro

 District Judge

cc: Counsel of Record

Case 1:06-cv-00280-PB Document 96 Filed 02/01/07 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

) 

PLAINTIFF ) 

) 

v. ) CIVIL NO. 06-203-DBH 

) 

JUDITH PUTZEL, ET AL., ) 

) 

DEFENDANTS ) 

ORDER ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION 

On June 30, 2008, Magistrate Judge Rich issued a recommended 

decision. See Recommended Decision on Cross-Motions for Summ. J. (Docket 

No. 26). The defendant Judith Putzel filed a written objection on July 11, 2008. 

See Objection to Magistrate’s Report Recommendation (Docket No. 28). I 

overruled her objection and adopted the recommended decision on July 22, 

2008. See Order (Docket No. 29). The result was to grant the government’s 

motion for summary judgment against Putzel. 

On August 1, 2008, in an Order to Show Cause, Magistrate Judge Rich 

directed Putzel to explain before September 2, 2008, why her cross-claim 

against the defendant Stephen Price should not be dismissed on the same 

reasoning as the summary judgment decision of July 22, 2008. See Order To 

Show Good Cause (Docket No. 30). Instead, on August 14, 2008, Putzel filed a 

motion to clarify portions of the June 30 recommended decision. See Motion for 

Case 1:06-cv-00203-DBH Document 32 Filed 09/08/08 Page 1 of 2
2 

Clarification (Docket No. 31). The motion asks what the word “cognizable” 

means, requests advice on how to “authenticate” documents, and asks what 

makes evidence “outcome-determinative.” 

I DENY the motion for clarification. If the recommended decision was 

obscure in some way to Putzel, she should have requested clarification before 

or when she objected to the recommended decision, and before I adopted it. 

Her request now is too late. The summary judgment decision stands. In 

lawyers’ terms, it is “law of the case,” which means that the summary 

judgment’s conclusions and legal principles are controlling for the rest of the 

lawsuit. Moreover, Putzel has given no indication how her requested 

clarifications could affect the viability of her cross-claim against Price. 

As a result, since the September 2, 2008, deadline has passed for her to 

explain why her cross-claim against Price should not be controlled by the 

summary judgment decision and she failed to provide an explanation, I also 

now DISMISS her cross-claim against the defendant Price. 

SO ORDERED. 

DATED THIS 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2008

 /s/D. Brock Hornby

 D. BROCK HORNBY

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00203-DBH Document 32 Filed 09/08/08 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Raymond Ngankou

v. Civil No. 06-cv-309-JD

United States of America

PROCEDURAL ORDER

The movant has filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to

vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence ordered by the court

following the movant's guilty plea in United States v. Raymond

Ngankou, 02-cr-124-01-JD. The court has reviewed the motion.

The court orders the United States Attorney to file an

answer within sixty (60) days of the date of this order, which

answer shall provide a detailed response, with appropriate

references to the record when necessary, to each claim asserted

by the movant.

In the event that the United States Attorney contends that

the motion is not timely filed under the limitations provided for

in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 or that it is a second or successive motion, 

a motion to dismiss in lieu of a response shall be filed within

thirty (30) days of the date of this order.

 SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

District Judge

September 5, 2006

cc: Raymond Ngankou, pro se

Aixa Maldonado-Quinones, Esquire

Case 1:06-cv-00309-JD Document 4 Filed 09/05/06 Page 1 of 1
#### Stanford BENOIT v. HUNT TOOL COMPANY et al.

No. 3212.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

March 28, 1950.

Bass & Brame, Lake Charles, for appellant.

St. Clair Adams & 'Son, New Orleans (P. A. Bienvenu, New Orleans, of counsel), for defendant.

Patin & Patin, Lake Charles, for war-rantor.

DORE, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the consolidated cases of Benoit, Holloway and Anchor Casualty Company v. Hunt Tool Company, La.App., 45 So.2d 512, the judgment appealed from is affirmd.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 05-cr-39-01-PB

Thomas Parodi

O R D E R

The defendant has moved to continue the September 7, 2005

trial in the above case. A plea agreement has been negotiated,

however additional time is required to schedule the plea hearing. 

The government does not object to a continuance of the trial

date.

Accordingly, in order to allow the parties additional time

to schedule a plea hearing or properly prepare for trial, the

court will continue the trial from September 7, 2005 to November

1, 2005. In agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds

pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated

reasons, the ends of justice served in granting a continuance 

Case 1:05-cr-00039-PB Document 19 Filed 09/02/05 Page 1 of 2
2

outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a

speedy trial.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

September 2, 2005

cc: Richard Monteith, Esq.

Mark Irish, Esq.

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00039-PB Document 19 Filed 09/02/05 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit
        32.2**
 **CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO**
 **18
        U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**
 **OF
        THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of Puget
        Energy, Inc. and Puget Sound Energy, Inc. (the
        "Companies") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 as
        filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
        "Form
        10-Q"), I, Bertrand
        A. Valdman, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
        Companies, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of
        the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
  (1)  The
        Form
        10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Companies.
 
 
 
 Date:
                  May 4, 2006/s/Bertrand
                  A. ValdmanBertrand
                  A. ValdmanSenior
                  Vice President andChief
                  Financial Officer
#### CARDOS et al. v. CRISTADORA et al.

No. 20375.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

April 12, 1954.

*601Rittenfoerg, Weinstein & Bronfin, Herbert J. Garon and Nathan Greenberg, New Orleans, for appellees.

Alcide J. Weysliam, New Orleans, for appellants.

PER CURIAM.

The amount involved in this appeal exceeds the sum of $2,000. Therefore, since this court does not have jurisdiction and both plaintiffs and defendants have suggested that the matter be transferred to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, exercising the authority vested in this Court by the provisions of LSA-R.S. 13:4441, 13:-4442,

It is now ordered, adjudged and decreed that this appeal be transferred to the Supreme Court of Louisiana pursuant to law, which transfer is to foe effected within sixty days and if such transfer should not be made within that time, then and in that event the appeal is to stand as though it 'had been dismissed. Defendants-appellants are to pay the costs of the appeal to this Court.

Appeal transferred to Supreme Court.