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.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice (08-074)]

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice of Availability of Inventions for Licensing.

# SUMMARY:

A patent application on the invention listed below assigned to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, has been filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and is available for licensing.

# DATES:

October 9, 2008.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Randy Heald, Patent Counsel, Kennedy Space Center, Mail Code CC-A, Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899; telephone (321) 867-7214; fax (321) 867-1817.

*NASA Case No. KSC-12909:*                         Repair Procedure Development System.                    

Dated: October 3, 2008.

Michael C. Wholley,

General Counsel.

 [FR Doc. E8-24035 Filed 10-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
Case 1:11-cv-02644-LTB Document 3 Filed 10/14/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4
Case 1:11-cv-02644-LTB Document 3 Filed 10/14/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4
Case 1:11-cv-02644-LTB Document 3 Filed 10/14/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4
Case 1:11-cv-02644-LTB Document 3 Filed 10/14/11 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4
Exhibit 23.5

 

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

The Board of Directors

HSBC Electronic Data Processing (Philippines) Inc.

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-138404 and No. 333-138404-01) on Form S-3 of HSBC Private Label Credit Card Master Note Trust (USA) I of our attestation report dated March 3, 2008 with respect to HSBC Electronic Data Processing (Philippines) Inc.’s  (the Company) assessment of compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in 1122(d)(4)(viii) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation ABapplicable to the servicing of asset backed securitization transactions backed by private label credit card receivables, as of and for the period from February 14, 2007 (date of issuance of the initial asset-backed securitization transaction covered by this report) through December 31, 2007. Management has determined that all other criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) are not applicable to the Company’s activities with respect to HSBCPrivate Label Credit Card Master Note Trust (USA) I relating to those criteria.  Our attestation report appears in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of HSBC Private Label Credit Card Master Note Trust (USA) I.  

 

/s/ KPMG LLP

 

Chicago, Illinois

March 24, 2008
#### John T. McGARRY, Appellant, v. The AMERICAN VALVE *&*METER COMPANY, a Corporation, and Wallace M. Gray, Appellees.

Nos. 7306, 7849.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Jan. 7, 1938.

Frank A. Whiteley, of Minneapolis, Minn., and Frank R. Gusweiler, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for áppellant.

. Kunkel & Kunkel and Allen & Allen, all of Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellees.

Before MOORMAN and HICKS, Circuit Judges, and SWINFORD, . District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The order appealed from in No. 7849 not being appealable, it is ordered that the appeal in this cause be dismissed; and, the court being of opinion that the evidence in cause No. 7306 does not clearly and convincingly show that the appellant was subjected to fraud, coercion, or duress by the appellees in causing the assignment of the patents in suit, and being further of opinion that there was no loss or damage shown upon the appellant’s second cause of action, it is ordered that the decree of the- court in that cause be affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02593-RPM

MARIA SALAZAR,

Plaintiff,

v.

HEALTHONE OF DENVER, INC.,

Defendant.

______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

_____________________________________________________________________

Upon consideration of the response to the Court’s Order to Show Cause [6] filed

on March 23, 2012, it is

ORDERED that this Court’s Order to Show Cause entered on March 15, 2012, is

discharged.

DATED: March 26th, 2012

BY THE COURT :

s/Richard P. Matsch

________________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02593-RPM Document 7 Filed 03/26/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**Chief Financial Officer Certification**

 

I, Wendy A. Nieto certify that:

 

(1)  I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Intraware, Inc. (the “registrant”);

 

(2)  Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

(3)  Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

(4)  The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(i)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(ii)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(iii)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

(5)  The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(i)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

(ii)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 

Dated:                July 16, 2007

 
| /s/   WENDY A. NIETO           |   |
|------------------------------------------|--------|
| Wendy A. Nieto                      |
| *Chief Financial Officer and Executive*  |
| *Vice President of Intraware, Inc.* |
| *(Principal Financial Officer)*          |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,583
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,583
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,808
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              397
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,500
<OTHER-SE>                                      60,750
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,808
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,875
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,875)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,875)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack,

 Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 

April 9, 2021

Order 

Clerk

April 9, 2021

162466

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

SC: 162466

v COA: 354547

Washtenaw CC: 87-021574-FC

STEVEN DEAN STAMPER,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, by stipulation of the parties to withdraw the application for 

leave to appeal, the application is DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1772 

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

127 South Elm Street in Gardner, Kansas, as the ‘‘Private First Class 

Shane R. Austin Post Office’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 12, 2007 

Mr. ROBERTS (for himself and Mr. BROWNBACK) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 127 South Elm Street in Gardner, Kansas, 

as the ‘‘Private First Class Shane R. Austin Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PRIVATE FIRST CLASS SHANE R. AUSTIN POST 

4 OFFICE. 

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

6 Postal Service located at 127 South Elm Street in Gard7 ner, Kansas, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Pri8 vate First Class Shane R. Austin Post Office’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•S 1772 IS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Private First Class 

5 Shane R. Austin Post Office’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Civil Case No. 11-cv-02310-REB-CBS

CHRISTINE T. HENZE,

Plaintiff,

v.

PEYTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 23-JT,

Defendant.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Blackburn, J.

The matter before me is the Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice [#50] filed

December 6, 2012. After careful review of the stipulation and the file, I conclude that

the stipulation should be approved and that this action should be dismissed with

prejudice.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That the Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice [#50] filed December 6,

2012, is APPROVED; and

2. That this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE with the parties to pay

their own attorney fees and costs.

Dated December 7, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

Case 1:11-cv-02310-REB-CBS Document 51 Filed 12/07/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
<page>			            EXHIBIT 32.01



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 Annual Report of Morgan Stanley Charter
Campbell L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-K for the period
ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffrey A.
Rothman, President, Demeter Management Corporation, the general
partner of the Partnership, 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 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 Partnership.





By:	  /s/	Jeffrey A. Rothman

Name:		Jeffrey A. Rothman
Title:	President

Date:		March 30, 2004
#### Frances O. WARRINER v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
# FILED AUG 1 9 2010 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District &Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbli ANTONIO COLBERT, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 

# 10 1399 F.B.I., Defendant. 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court upon consideration ofplaintiffs application to proceed 

### in formapauperis and his 

### pro se complaint. The application will be granted, and the complaint will be dismissed. Plaintiffalleges that hehas "made several attempts to file cases ... involvingpolice misconduct[,]" and has insteadbeen subjected to harassmentbythe FBI's security staff. CompI. at 2. He appears to demand that the FBI monitor its employees' calls "because these people think they [are] god[']s gift to the Earth." Id. In addition, he demands an award of$10,000. Id. The Court has reviewed plaintiffs complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by 

### prose litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted bylawyers. 

### See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,520 (1972). Even

### prose litigants, however, must complywith the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure. 

### Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) ofthe Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure requires that a complaint contain a short and plain statement ofthe grounds upon which the court'sjurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement ofthe claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand forjudgment for the reliefthe pleader seeks. Fed. 

### R. Civ. P. 8(a). The purpose ofthe minimum

\.

### standard ofRule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants ofthe claim being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whether the doctrine ofresjudicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiffs complaint does not contain a short and plain statement ofthe grounds upon which the Court'sjurisdiction depends or a claim that plaintiffis entitled to the reliefhe seeks. Forthese reasons, the complaint will be dismissed for its failure to complywith Rule 8(a). An 

### Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

DATE:

# ~ ,(7-- J 

## 020 (0
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 Annual Report of Dynatronics Corporation on Form
10-KSB for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Kelvyn H. Cullimore, Jr.,
Chief Executive Officer and Terry M. Atkinson, Principal Accounting 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 result of operations of the
Company.



                          /s/ Kelvyn H. Cullimore, Jr.
                        --------------------------------------------
                        Kelvyn H. Cullimore, Jr.
                        President and Chief Executive Officer
                        Dynatronics Corporation

                         /s/ Terry M. Atkinson
                        ----------------------------------------------
                        Terry M. Atkinson
                        Controller
                        (Principal Accounting Officer)
A.
    
    Amendments. The Agreement is hereby amended as follows:
 1.
    
    The third to last paragraph in Section 3.1(b) of the Agreement is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety to read as follows:
  2.
    
    The paragraph immediately following clause (e) of Article 7 of the Agreement is
hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:
  3.
    
    Section 8.1(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to
read as follows:




---



##### 



B.
    
    Continuing Effect. Except as otherwise amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect.
  2




---



##### 



MANAGER
EATON VANCE MANAGEMENTBy:
    /s/ Deidre E. WalshDeidre E. Walsh Vice President 3
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61073-61079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24406]



[[Page 61073]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal Nos. 08-93]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 
601-3740.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittals 08-93 with attached transmittal, policy 
justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

    Dated: October 7, 2008.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 61074]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.042


[[Page 61075]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.043


[[Page 61076]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.044


[[Page 61077]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.045


[[Page 61078]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.046


[[Page 61079]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15OC08.047

[FR Doc. E8-24406 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1706 

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to authorize 

the Secretary of Agriculture to consider variations in the national average 

market price for different classes of wheat when determining the eligibility of wheat producers for counter-cyclical payments for the 2007 

crop year. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 27, 2007 

Mrs. MURRAY (for herself and Ms. CANTWELL) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 

of 2002 to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to 

consider variations in the national average market price 

for different classes of wheat when determining the eligibility of wheat producers for counter-cyclical payments 

for the 2007 crop year. 

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 ‘‘Wheat Counter-Cycli5 cal Payments Enhancement Act’’. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•S 1706 IS

1 SEC. 2. USE OF FLEXIBLE EFFECTIVE PRICES FOR DIF2 FERENT CLASSES OF WHEAT TO DETERMINE 

3 ELIGIBILITY OF WHEAT PRODUCERS FOR 

4 COUNTER-CYCLICAL PAYMENTS. 

5 Section 1104 of the Farm Security and Rural Invest6 ment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7914) is amended— 

7 (1) in subsection (b), by inserting ‘‘and subject 

8 to subsection (g),’’ after ‘‘subsection (a),’’; and 

9 (2) by adding at the end the following new sub10 section: 

11 ‘‘(g) SPECIAL EFFECTIVE PRICES FOR CLASSES OF

12 WHEAT.— 

13 ‘‘(1) SEPARATE EFFECTIVE PRICES AUTHOR14 IZED.—For purposes of the 2007 crop year of 

15 wheat, the Secretary shall calculate a separate effec16 tive price for all classes of wheat in recognition of 

17 the wide variations in average market prices for dif18 ferent classes of wheat. 

19 ‘‘(2) CALCULATION.—In the case of wheat for 

20 purposes of subsection (a), when the Secretary cal21 culates a separate effective price for a class of 

22 wheat, the effective price for that class of wheat 

23 shall be equal to the sum of— 

24 ‘‘(A) the higher of— 

25 ‘‘(i) the national average market price 

26 received by producers during the 12-month 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
3 

•S 1706 IS

1 marketing year for that class of wheat, as 

2 determined by the Secretary; or 

3 ‘‘(ii) the national average loan rate for 

4 that class of wheat during that period, as 

5 determined by the Secretary; and 

6 ‘‘(B) the payment rate in effect for wheat 

7 under section 1103 for the purpose of making 

8 direct payments with respect to wheat.’’. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS