alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 196 (Thursday, October 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 61098]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24036]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--ASTM International Standards

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 11, 2014, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), ASTM International 
(``ASTM'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing additions 
or changes to its standards development activities. The notifications 
were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting 
the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Specifically, ASTM has provided an updated list of 
current, ongoing ASTM standards activities originating between May 2014 
and September 2014 designated as Work Items. A complete listing of ASTM 
Work Items, along with a brief description of each, is available at 
http://www.astm.org.
    On September 15, 2004, ASTM filed its original notification 
pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of 
the Act on November 10, 2004 (69 FR 65226).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 7, 2014. 
A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) 
of the Act on June 9, 2014 (79 FR 32999).

Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2014-24036 Filed 10-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
NASA Space Ccanuniconon ‘and: Navigation (SC
SBIR Commercialization Workshop. a

http://sbirnasa.gov/scan-workshop
#### Ellison and Another *v.*Johnson, for the Use of Hobbs.

*Thursday, July*18.

A person for whose use a suit is brought being liable, by statute, for costs if the suit fail, is not a competent witness for the plaintiff.

Nor can he be rendered competent in such case by his release of his interest in the cause of action to the plaintiff.

ERROR to the *La Grange*Circuit Court.

Sullivan, J.

— Debt on a promissory note by Johnson, for the use of *J. T.*Hobbs, against the plaintiffs in error. The suit was commenced before a justice of the peace. The cause was tried upon the general issue, and a special plea the character of which is not disclosed by the record. The Circuit Court gave judgment for the plaintiff On the trial, the plaintiff offered as a witness *J. T.*Hobbs, the person for whose use the suit was brought, to prove that certain payments that had been sworn to by a former witness had not been made. The defendants objected. *Hobbs*stated on his *voire dire*that he had no interest in the suit, and that it was prosecuted for the benefit of one *Chapman.*He also wrote and tendered to *Johnson*a release of all claim to the note on which the suit was founded, and to the proceeds thereof. The defendants still objected to the competency of *Hobbs*as a witness, but the Court overruled the objection and he was sworn accordingly.

*218
      *H.*Cooper, for the plaintiffs.

*J. B.*Howe, for the defendant.

The Court erred in admitting *Hobbs*as a witness. By the terms of the statute, he was liable to a judgment for costs if the plaintiff failed in the suit. R. S. 1838, p. 458, sec^ The release tendered by the witness to *Johnson*could not remove that liability.

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is reversed at the costs of *Hobbs.*Cause remanded, &c.
#### PRENTISS v. ALLSTATE INS. CO.

No. 393P01

Case below: 144 N.C. App. 404

Motion by defendant to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 4 October 2001. Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 4 October 2001.
**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 Pediatric Services of America, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James M. McNeill, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuantto § 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(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: August 12, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2243 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
                                S. 2243

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 17, 2004

            Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a 
             hydroelectric project in the State of Alaska.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 
              PROJECT.

    Notwithstanding the time period specified in section 13 of the 
Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would otherwise apply to the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project numbered 11480, the 
Commission may, at the request of the licensee for the project, and 
after reasonable notice, in accordance with the good faith, due 
diligence, and public interest requirements of that section and the 
Commission's procedures under that section extend the time period 
during which the licensee is required to commence the construction of 
the project for 3 consecutive 2-year periods beyond the date that is 4 
years after the date of issuance of the license.

            Passed the Senate September 15, 2004.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
#### JOSEPH M. CAVO v. CHARLES J. TAYLOR.

July 2, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
EXHIBIT 15


                           ACCOUNTANT'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT


We  acknowledge the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form  S-3 (filed in October 2000 and March 2001) and Form S-8 (filed in November
1997)  of  Penn  Octane  Corporation of our report dated December 10, 2004 which
appears  on  page  3  of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
October  31,  2004.


          /s/  BURTON MCCUMBER & CORTEZ, L.L.P.


Brownsville, Texas
December 15, 2004


<PAGE>
#### Schoonover *v.*Rowe.

*Monday, July*15.

In slander the jury cannot, *in assessing the damages,*take into consideration evidence of the defendant’s having spoken, since the commencement of the suit, the same words as those laid in the declaration.

ERROR to the *La Grange*Circuit Court.

Sullivan, J.

— Slander by *Rowe*against *Schoonover.*The defendant pleaded the general issue and two special pleas. As no question arises on the special pleas, it is not necessary to state them particularly. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff

On the trial, the plaintiff proved the speaking of the words as laid in the declaration ; — he also proved the speaking of the same words after the commencement of the suit.

The Court instructed the jury, that they had a right to not only infer malice from the words spoken since the commencement of the suit, but that they had a right, and it was then-duty, to take the last-mentioned words into consideration in assessing the damages, if they found the defendant guilty. To that instruction, with others which were not objectionable, the defendant excepted.

*203*H.*Cooper, for the plaintiff.

*J. B.*Howe, for the defendant.

The instruction was erroneous. Admitting that proof of words spoken since the commencement of the suit, may received to show the malice with which the words laid in the declaration were spoken, the jury cannot consider them in assessing the damages. The damages must be for the words for which the suit is brought. This point was substantially decided in the cases of *M'Glemery*v. Keller, 3 Blackf. 488, and *Throgmorton*v. *Davis et ux.*4 *id.*174.(1)

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.

(1)

 The following is a late *English*case on tho subject. Suit for a libel contained in a letter addressed by the defendant to a third person. Plea, not guilty. On the trial, the plaintiff, after proving the libel charged, offered in evidence two letters written after the commencement of the suit containing, in substance, a repetition of the libellous matter for which the action was brought. These letters were received *at nisi prius,*on the ground that they would show the *animus*of the defendant in writing the libel in question. On a motion for a new trial, the question whether the letters were properly received, was very fully discussed, and decided in the affirmative. The language of the Court is, *inter alia,*as follows: “ And this appears to us to be the correct rule, viz., that either party may, with a view to the damages, give evidence to prove or disprove the existence of a malicious motive in the mind of the publisher of defamatory matter ; but that, if the evidence given for that purpose establishes another cause of action, the jury should be cautioned against giving any damages in respect of it. And, if such evidence is offered merely for the purpose of obtaining damages for such subsequent injury, it will be properly rejected.” New trial refused. *Pearson*v. *Lemaitre,*5 Mann. & Grang. 700. See, also, *Forbes*v. *Myers, May*term, 1846.
The Honorable Cynthia Holcomb Hall, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth * Circuit, sitting by designation.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 98-1999EA

_____________ Jimmy Hampton, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Arkansas. * Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of * [UNPUBLISHED] Social Security, * * Appellee. *

_____________ Submitted: November 20, 1998

Filed: November 27, 1998

_____________ Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, FAGG, and HALL, Circuit Judges. *

_____________ PER CURIAM. Jimmy H ampton appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment upholding the Comm

issioner's decision to deny Hampton disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Having carefully reviewed the admini strative record and the parties' submissio ns, we conclude that no error of fact or law appears and that an opinion would lack precedential value. We thus affirm the judgment of the district court without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 11.1


                    RESOURCE BANCSHARES MORTGAGE GROUP, INC.
               STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE,
                      BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE


                                    ($ in thousands, except per share amounts)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                    For the Nine Months Ended     For the Quarter Ended
                                                        September 30, 2001         September 30, 2001
                                                    -------------------------     ---------------------
<S>                                                        <C>                           <C>
Net income                                                    $15,151                       $6,482

Net income per common share from continuing
operations-Basic(1)                                           $  0.93                       $ 0.40

Net loss per common share from continuing
operations-Diluted(2)                                         $  0.91                       $ 0.39
</TABLE>



(1)  The number of common shares used to compute the net income per share above
     was 16,368,382 for the nine months ended September 30, 2001 and 16,273,761
     for the quarter ended September 30, 2001.
(2)  The number of common shares used to compute the net income per share above
     was 16,609,335 for the nine months ended September 30, 2001 and 16,552,512
     for the quarter ended September 30, 2001.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Northwest Bancorporation, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Christopher C. Jurey, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (a) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered
by the Report.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



By

/s/ Christopher C. JureyChristopher C. Jurey, Chief Financial Officer




Date: November 9, 2004
##### 



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 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, each of the undersigned officers of Rent-Way, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to
such officers knowledge, that: The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2004, (the Form 10-Q) of the
Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Dated: February 7, 2005
    
    /s/ William E. MorgensternWilliam E. Morgenstern,
Chief Executive OfficerDated: February 7, 2005
    
    /s/ William A. McDonnellWilliam A. McDonnell,
Chief Financial Officer
 This certification is being furnished solely to accompany this Form-10Q pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company unless such
incorporation is expressly referenced herein.
# STS-3

S82-26315 (4 Feb. 1982) --- This is the insignia for NASA's third flight (STS-3) of the Space Transportation System's (STS)...

S81-41004 (30 Nov. 1981) --- These two veteran astronauts were named today as the prime crew members for STS-3 in...

S82-25504 (20 Jan. 1982) --- These two veteran astronauts were named as prime crew members for STS-3 in the space...

S82-28454 (19 Feb. 1982) --- Astronaut Jack R. Lousma, right, STS-3 commander, and C. Gordon Fullerton, pilot, carry portable spacesuit...

STS-3 on Launch Pad 39A with searchlights during loading tests.

STS003-23-178 (22-30 March 1982) --- Astronaut C. Gordon Fullerton, STS-3 pilot, examines Student Experiment 81-8 (SE-81-8) Insect Flight Motion Study...

S82-28839 (30 March 1982) --- Seconds from touchdown, the space shuttle Columbia (STS-3), with astronauts Jack R. Lousma and C....

OV-102 lands at White Sands, NM, after STS-3.

Space Shuttle Columbia touches down on the gypsum surface of Northrup Strip at the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range...

Space Shuttle Columbia touches down on the gypsum surface of Northrup Strip at the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range...

Both a fixed Stiffleg Derrick and a large mobile crane were used to hoist Space Shuttle Columbia into the air...

With Space Shuttle Columbia mounted firmly atop, NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft 905 kicks up clouds of gypsum...
Lease Agreement                                          The Document Company
                                                               XEROX

Customer's Legal Name:             Vista Vacations International

Street Address:                    5653 NW 29th St.

City/State/Zip Code:               Margate, FL 33063

Tax ID#650877427

Negotiated Contract                #0709364

County Installed in:               Broward

Customer requested install date:   3/15/99

Product:
(serial number)                    5760DADF

Minimum Monthly Lease Payment      $252.60

Print Charge (Meter #1)            $.16

Print Charge (Meter #2)            $.04

Customer Name:             Teri Nadler               Phone: 954-975-0898
Title:            Owner/Pres.                        Date: 3/16/99

Agreement presented by:
Name:  Linda Cope                   phone: 305-655-9960



                                      185
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT**

** **

** **

 

I, Everett F. Jefferson,certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof Fresh Choice, Inc.

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, thisquarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

 

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

 

4.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

 

(a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

 
|   |  Date: October 10, 2003           |
|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   |                                   |
|   |                                   |
|   | /S/ Everett  F. Jefferson              |   |
|   | Everett F.  Jefferson                  |
|   | President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2258 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2258

To revise certain requirements for H-2B employers for fiscal year 2004, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 30, 2004

   Mr. Hatch (for himself, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Allen, Mr. Gregg, Ms. 
  Collins, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Warner, and Mr. Thomas) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To revise certain requirements for H-2B employers for fiscal year 2004, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Summer Operations and Services (SOS) 
Relief and Reform Act''.

SEC. 2. NUMERICAL LIMITATIONS ON H-2B WORKERS.

    Section 214(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1184(g)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(9) Any alien who has already been counted, within the 2 years 
prior to the approval of a petition for a temporary worker described in 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(B), toward the numerical limitations of 
paragraph (1)(B) shall not again be counted toward those 
limitations.''.

SEC. 3. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY.

    The Secretary of Homeland Security may delegate to the Secretary of 
Labor, if the Secretary of Labor agrees, any authority to investigate 
fraud or misrepresentation on the part of an alien or an employer in 
connection with a visa described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(B) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(B)).

SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATES.

    This Act and the amendment made by this Act shall take effect as if 
enacted on October 1, 2003, and shall expire on October 1, 2004.
                                 <all>
```