alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### National Park Service

Pursuant to section 60.15 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being accepted on the following properties being considered for removal from the National Register of Historic Places. Comments may be forwarded by United States Postal Service, to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St., NW., MS 2280, Washington, DC 20240; by all other carriers, National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye St., NW., 8th floor, Washington DC 20005; or by fax, 202-371-6447. Written or faxed comments should be submitted by November 10, 2010.

Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

J. Paul Loether,

Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks Program.

Request for REMOVAL has been made for the following resources:

## KENTUCKY

## Jefferson County

Drumanard Boundary Increase, 6401 Wolf Pen Branch Rd, Louisville, 88002654

[FR Doc. 2010-27058 Filed 10-25-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4312-51-P
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1720 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1720

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
       To provide for Federal court proceedings in Plano, Texas.

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

SECTION 1. CHANGE IN COMPOSITION OF DIVISIONS OF EASTERN DISTRICT OF 
              TEXAS.

    (a) In General.--Section 124(c) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (3)--
                    (A) by striking ``Denton, and Grayson'' and 
                inserting ``Delta, Denton, Fannin, Grayson, Hopkins, 
                and Lamar''; and
                    (B) by inserting ``and Plano'' after ``held at 
                Sherman'';
            (2) by striking paragraph (4) and redesignating paragraphs 
        (5) through (7) as paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively; 
        and
            (3) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated, by inserting 
        ``Red River,'' after ``Franklin,''.
    (b) Effective Date.--
            (1) In general.--This section and the amendments made by 
        this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of 
        this Act.
            (2) Pending cases not affected.--This section and the 
        amendments made by this section shall not affect any action 
        commenced before the effective date of this section and pending 
        in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 
        Texas on such date.
            (3) Juries not affected.--This section and the amendments 
        made by this section shall not affect the composition, or 
        preclude the service, of any grand or petit jury summoned, 
        impaneled, or actually serving in the Eastern Judicial District 
        of Texas on the effective date of this section.

            Passed the Senate November 4, 2003.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
108th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1720

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

       To provide for Federal court proceedings in Plano, Texas.
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1


                                  CERTIFICATION

            Pursuant to 18. U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of
Stonepath Group, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies that the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



Date: March 31, 2003                    By: /s/ Dennis L. Pelino
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            Dennis L. Pelino
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


            This certification is made solely for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, subject to the knowledge standard set forth therein, and not for any other
purpose. It is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Stonepath Group, Inc. and will be retained by Stonepath Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
A04A1409.

#### MARSHALL v. THE STATE.

(602 SE2d 227)

ELDRIDGE, Judge.

A Richmond County jury found Darren Marshall guilty of the burglary of the K&D Dry Cleaners on Laney Walker Boulevard in Augusta. He appeals, raising a challenge to both the sufficiency of the evidence and the introduction of similar transaction evidence. Finding no basis for reversal, we affirm.

1. Marshall first challenges the sufficiency of the evidence against him. In that regard, the evidence of record shows that a woman who had known Marshall for years testified at trial that she heard a burglar alarm go off at K&D Dry Cleaners; that she saw the window *445of the cleaners had been broken out; and that she saw Marshall run inside, grab items of clothing, and run back outside. Immediately after the burglary, Marshall’s Georgia Department of Corrections prison identification card was found on the floor inside the K&D Dry Cleaners. Blood was located at the point of entry into the dry cleaners, and Marshall was stopped twenty minutes after the burglary, two blocks away, bleeding from cuts on his hands and arm. A cassette player and items of clothing were taken from the cleaners during the burglary. Viewed to support the verdict, we find this evidence sufficient for a rational trier of fact to have found Marshall guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense as charged.1

Decided July 9, 2004.

*Mario A. Pacella,*for appellant.

*Daniel J. Craig, District Attorney, Charles R. Sheppard, Assistant District Attorney,*for appellee.

2. In his last claim of error, Marshall objects to the admission of evidence of two prior acts of burglary. However, “[t]he rule requiring that a party object at trial to similar transaction evidence is firm, and we are bound to follow it.”2 By failing to object at trial, Marshall waived this issue on appeal.3

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Ruffin, P. J., and Adams, J., concur.*

1

*Jackson v.*Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).

2

 (Citation and punctuation omitted.) *Thompson v. State,*262 Ga. App. 17,19 (2) (585 SE2d 125) (2003); *Upshaw v. State,*257 Ga. App. 199,200 (2) (570 SE2d 640) (2002); *Giraudy v. State,*252 Ga. App. 219, 221 (3) (555 SE2d 874) (2001).

3

 Following testimonial evidence about one of the prior acts of burglary, Marshall’s subsequent objection to the introduction of a copy of his *plea and sentence*thereon does not preserve this claim for review, because “[i]t is well settled that a reason urged by enumeration of error on appeal which is different from that urged below will not be considered for the first time on appeal.” (Punctuation and footnote omitted.) *Caldwell v. State,*247 Ga. App. 191, 199 (3) (b) (i) (542 SE2d 564) (2000).
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

            Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of
Stonepath Group, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies that the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2002 (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



Date: January 16, 2004               By: /s/ Bohn H. Crain
                                         -------------------------------------
                                         Bohn H. Crain
                                         Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

            This certification is made solely for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, subject to the knowledge standard set forth therein, and not for any other
purpose. It is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Stonepath Group, Inc. and will be retained by Stonepath Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
HIRRIE ROBINSON

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 16

- 3250

_____________________________/

Opinion filed September 1, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. Angela C. Dempsey

, Judge

.

Mark V. Murray, Tallahassee , for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Virginia Harris and Kaitlin Weiss, Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WINOKUR

, JAY

, and M.K. THOMAS

, J J

. , CONCUR.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT SUNSHINE WORKFORCE, LLC, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D20-1293 ) SUNZ INSURANCE SOLUTIONS, LLC; ) SUNZ INSURANCE COMPANY; ) STEVE TABARRINI; and VICTOR ) TABARRINI, ) ) Appellees. ) ) Opinion filed September 18, 2020. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 from the Circuit Court for Manatee County; Charles Sniffen, Judge. Basil L. Bain of The Bain Law Firm, P.L., Naples, for Appellant. Katherine E. Giddings of Akerman LLP, Tallahassee; Jason L. Margolin of Akerman LLP, Jacksonville; and Jason S. Oletsky of Akerman LLP, Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellees Sunz Insurance Solutions, LLC and Sunz Insurance Company. No appearance on behalf of Appellees Steve Tabarrini and Victor Tabarrini.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.- 2 -

NORTHCUTT, ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7844

LUCIUS EDWARD ALSTON, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus
VANESSA ADAMS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-551-1) Submitted: April 27, 2006 Decided: May 4, 2006 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lucius Edward Alston, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Lucius Edward Alston, Jr., filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition against Vanessa Adams, the warden at the Petersburg Federal Correctional Complex, challenging the fact that when his federal detention ended he would be turned over to Virginia authorities. Alston contends that he owes Virginia no time. While this appeal was pending, Alston was released from federal custody and is now being held by Virginia authorities. The Constitution limits the jurisdiction of federal courts to actual cases or controversies. U.S. Const. art. III, § 2; Honig v. Doe , 484 U.S. 305, 317 (1988). The controversy must be present at all stages of review. Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona , 520 U.S. 43, 66 (1997). When a case becomes moot after judgment in the district court, the appellate court has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Mellen v. Bunting, 327 F.3d 355, 363-64 (4th Cir. 2003). As Alston is no longer held in federal custody, his action against Adams is moot. Any relief he seeks against Virginia must be filed against a state defendant after exhaustion of his state remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as moot. 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. DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.1

                           CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL
                          EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 Annual Report of Caspian Services, Inc., on Form
10-KSB for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Laird Garrard, Principal Executive 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:

         (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: January 9, 2006                             By: /s/ Laird Garrard
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Laird Garrard,
                                                     Principal Executive Officer
# ASTRONAUT JAMES A. LOVELL, JR.  – MISC. – GT-7 PRELAUNCH ACTIVITY

S65-60981 (4 Dec. 1965) --- Astronaut James A. Lovell Jr., pilot of the Gemini-7 spacecraft, walks up the ramp at Pad 19 during the Gemini-7 prelaunch countdown. Lovell and fellow astronaut Frank Borman, command pilot, entered the elevator which took them up to the White Room and their waiting spacecraft. Gemini-7 was successfully launched at 2:30 p.m. (EST), Dec. 4, 1965. Photo credit: NASA

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/amf-s65-60981/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareTakenDecember 4, 1965ProducerJSCSize1532x1920pxPIA Numbers65-60981The National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.
- About NASA's Mission
Join Us- Home
- News & Events
- Multimedia
- NASA+
- Missions
- Humans in Space
- Earth & Climate
- The Solar System
- The Universe
- Science
- Aeronautics
- Technology
- Learning Resources
- About NASA
- NASA en Español
Follow NASA-   
-   
-   
-   
- 
- More NASA Social Accounts
- NASA Newsletters
- Sitemap
- For Media
- Privacy Policy
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
- Office of the IGBudget & Annual Reports
Agency Financial Reports
Contact NASA
Accessibility
-  									Page Last Updated:								  								Mar 26, 2023								 
-  									Page Editor:								   
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 65658]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27023]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Importer of Controlled Substances;Notice of Application

    This is notice that on July 22, 2010, Cody Laboratories Inc., 601 
Yellowstone Avenue, Cody, Wyoming 82414-9321, made application by 
renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for registration 
as an importer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed in 
schedule II:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raw Opium (9600)...........................  II
Concentrate of Poppy Straw (9670)..........  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to import narcotic raw materials for 
manufacturing and further distribution to its customers. The company is 
registered with DEA as a manufacturer of several controlled substances 
that are manufactured from raw opium, poppy straw, and concentrate of 
poppy straw.
    As explained in the Correction to Notice of Application pertaining 
to Rhodes Technologies, 72 FR 3417 (2007), comments and requests for 
hearings on applications to import narcotic raw material are not 
appropriate.
    As noted in a previous notice published in the Federal Register on 
September 23, 1975, (40 FR 43745), all applicants for registration to 
import a basic class of any controlled substances in schedule I or II 
are, and will continue to be, required to demonstrate to the Deputy 
Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 
Administration, that the requirements for such registration pursuant to 
21 U.S.C. 958(a); 21 U.S.C. 823(a); and 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d), 
(e), and (f) are satisfied.

    Dated: October 19, 2010.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator,Office of Diversion Control,Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-27023 Filed 10-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
* This panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not

materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2);

10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral

argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited,

however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and

10th Cir. R. 32.1.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

May 27, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MARTIN ARRENDONDOVALENZUELA,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 09-3350

(D.C. No. 2:08-CR-20160-KHV-2)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before LUCERO, O’BRIEN, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Martin Arrendondo-Valenzuela pleaded

guilty to conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute fifty

grams or more of methamphetamine. The district court determined that the

defendant’s advisory guideline range was 360 months to life imprisonment, and

imposed a sentence at the low end of 360 months’ imprisonment. Although the

Appellate Case: 09-3350 Document: 01018430312 Date Filed: 05/27/2010 Page: 1 
-2-

plea agreement contained a waiver of his appellate rights, defendant filed a notice

of appeal.

The government has moved to enforce the plea agreement based on

defendant’s appellate waiver. Under United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315, 1325

(10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam), we will enforce an appellate waiver if

(1) the “appeal falls within the scope of the waiver of appellate rights;” (2) “the

defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights;” and

(3) “enforcing the waiver would [not] result in a miscarriage of justice.” In

response to the government’s motion, defendant’s counsel filed a response stating

that he can find no basis for an appeal of the sentence imposed or to oppose the

government’s motion to enforce the plea agreement. Based on our review, we

conclude that defendant cannot establish any of the applicable exceptions to

enforcement of his appeal waiver.

Accordingly, we GRANT the government’s motion to enforce and

DISMISS this appeal.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

PER CURIAM

Appellate Case: 09-3350 Document: 01018430312 Date Filed: 05/27/2010 Page: 2