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 Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1840]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) is announcing the availability of a document entitled “Validation Rules for Study Data Tabulation Model (SDTM) Formatted Studies.” CDER is making this document available to improve the standardization and quality of clinical data submitted to CDER, as well as to improve the predictability of data quality and usefulness.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Office of Strategic Programs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 1192, Silver Spring, MD 20993, email:                         *edata@fda.hhs.gov*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    CDER supports the regulatory submission of standardized clinical study data based on the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium SDTM. Upon receipt of the data, CDER validates the data using a set of validation rules. The “Validation Rules for SDTM Formatted Studies” is an Excel file that provides a human readable description of a rule set for validation. Submitters of clinical study data can use this information to understand how FDA validates the data. The file is available on FDA's Study Data Standards Resources Web page at                     *http://www.fda.gov/​ForIndustry/​DataStandards/​StudyDataStandards/​default.htm.*                     It contains a combination of conformance rules (i.e., how well the data conform to the standard) and business rules (i.e., quality checks; how well the data may support useful analysis). The rules may be updated periodically as new or updated validation rules are developed. The Change History tab will provide a descriptive change history of the document.                

Dated: November 14, 2014.

Leslie Kux,

Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 2014-27384 Filed 11-18-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
Exhibit 32.2

Polypore International, Inc.  Chief Financial Officer Certification  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Polypore International, Inc. (the "Company") for the
period ended January 1, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Lynn Amos, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does
hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



By:

/s/ LYNN AMOS Lynn Amos Chief Financial OfficerDate: February 25, 2011


---



QuickLinks
August 2001 

Providing the Option for Metric-Only Labeling 

By: Gerard C. Iannelli 

Over the years, the NIST Metric Program, now part of the Office of Weights and 

Measures, has worked to promote the understanding, awareness, and acceptance of the 

use of metric units in the United States. The Metric Program 

continually explores opportunities to facilitate the use of the metric system in the United 

States. One area of activity is to encourage actions at the Federal and State level to allow 

the net contents of consumer packages to be stated only in metric units. Since the 

European Union has a labeling directive that will require consumer packages to be 

labeled only in metric units after January 1, 2010, U.S. manufacturers and exporters may 

find a competitive advantage in stating the content of packaged goods only in metric 

units. As more manufacturers adopt rational metric sizes in their packaging, it should be 

easier for them to market those packages throughout the world. 

The Metric Program is undertaking an effort to encourage changes to the Federal Fair 

Packaging and Labeling 

Act (FPLA) that would give manufacturers the option to state the net contents of 

packages in only 

metric units or to state the net contents in both metric and inch-pound units (dual unit 

labeling). While FPLA governs labeling requirements for many consumer packages, the 

National Conference on Weights and 

Measures acted in 1999 to change Section 11.33 of the Uniform Packaging and Labeling 

Regulation to permit metric-only labeling on packages not covered by Federal laws or 

regulations. 

Based on information provided by State weights and measures offices, State laws or 

regulations in 25 out of 53 jurisdictions do not appear to permit the labeling of packages 

in only metric units. However, 12 of these 25 jurisdictions did not provide information on 

the subject. 

While supporting efforts to change the FPLA, the Metric Program also wants to work 

with State jurisdictions to encourage changes to the State laws or regulations to give 

packagers the option to label the net content of packages in only metric units. In the near 

future, the Metric Program staff will be contacting the weights and measures 

directors in these 25 jurisdictions to discuss this subject and ask if they need information 

that would help them prepare proposals to their legislatures to change their laws or 

regulations. Existing examples of the language in the laws of States that allow the 

labeling of packages in only metric units may be useful to the remaining 25 jurisdictions. 

If you have any questions on this subject, please contact Gerry Iannelli (301) 975-5019, 

Jim McCracken (301) 975-3686 or Linda Crown (301) 975-3998. The office’s email 

address is metric_prg@nist.gov.
Exhibit 32.2

Polypore International, Inc.  Chief Financial Officer Certification  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Polypore International, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended January 3, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Lynn Amos, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:



By:

/s/ LYNN AMOS Lynn Amos Chief Financial Officer


Date:
March 10, 2009

---



QuickLinks
OFFICEOFTHEA~~ORNEYOENER~OFTEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Hr. Fred xorri8 

hmty Aubltor 

Lfrln&8ton, Texar 

Dear air: 

00, drpreoiaOS autonobilea. 
?o 

I : . 

. ; 

Mr. Yrd Xotris, Namh 27, lOSO, Pago 2 

the noooeolty thsrefor, allow one or more 

automobiles to be wed by the sherlfr In the 

dlsohargo of his official dutiaa, whioh, If 

purohooed by the oounty, ohall be bou&ht in 

the -6s preoorlbed by lax for the purohaso 

or supplies and paid tar out or the General 

Fund or tho oounty and thoy ahall b8 and rcmain the property or tho oouuty. The rxponee 

or aaIntonano0, &prooIatIon and oporatIca~@ 

ouob automobiles eo caay bo allok&, whether - 

puroha8od by the oounty or own*6 by tne nhsrirr 

or hi4 doputioo pereonally, oball be pald for 

by the aberlff and the amount thomor ohall 

be mpottd by tho ohortrt 0x1 tho report l bwo 

masMonod, In the- mame mannor as herein prorids6 Sot othor expon801~~ 

A8 uIl1 bo notod from tho above.quoted la-o, 

thd oxpm6e of mainbenanoe, UeprooIatIon and 0pemtIan 

OS mob automobilea ~&lowed the ,aharISt whether owned' 

by bin psroonally, hko doputloo poroonolly or the oouaty 

ohall be paid for by the ahetISf and reported by the 

l hetlfi on the report mqntnd by Artlola 5899. 

Ilo fafl to find say 1ImIktlbn In Art1010 8S99 

or 01Seuhe~0 In the statute8 as to the onourtt that oan 

bo alaImod by the shotlff for otafatenanoo, doproeirtlou 

and operation of auWobIlo8. Suah Artiolo merely roqallrsr that: 

*...,ruah expon&e aoootmt ohall be subjeot to tho audit of county audItor, If any, 

othorwicls by the GozatItu~Io~t~* Court;.and 

li It appear@ that any Ittsa Of 6ueh oxpenoo 

was not Inourmd by euoh oifioer or suoh item 

woe not a neoessary oxpease or 0rri00, ouah 

Item shall be by euch audItor.or oourt rajeoted, In whtoh aaae the oolloatlona of ouch Item 

may be adjudioated In any aourt of ooatpetont 

jurI5QIotIon. - 

It la, therefore, the oplnlon ot this Department and you art 80 adrfsed. that there Io no 1Imitatlon 

upon the amount that a abrlii ban alalm ao expense of 
Mr. ?nU Borrle, Maroh 27, lQS9, Page 3 

offlao ror malntonanae, deproolation and operation of 

autcmoblles used In the execution of the dutlas of 01s 

orrice sxoapt that they ba *....a neoessary expense 

0r orri00.- 

vary truly yours 

LAtAW
#### The State of Ohio, Appellee, *v.*Moore, Appellant.

(No. 1992

Decided November 18, 1948.)

*Mr. Irvin Carl Delscamp,*for appellee.

*Mr. Walter L. Connors,*for appellant.

By the Court.

The cause is submitted on motion of appellee to dismiss the appeal for failure to comply with the provisions of Section 13459-3, General Code, in that appellant failed to file his brief with the transcript.

The provisions of Section 13459-3, General Code, are mandatory and a motion to dismiss the appeal will be sustained for failure to comply therewith. *State*v. *Trimmer,*80 Ohio App., 545, 547, 76 N. E. (2d), 896; *State v. Jarcho,*65 Ohio App., 417, 30 N. E. (2d), 444; *State v. Parnell,*56 Ohio App., 77, 10 N. E. (2d), 18; *State*v. *Bell,*52 Ohio App., 11, 2 N. E. (2d), 786; *State*v. *Davis,*47 Ohio Law Abs., 415; *State*v. *Barber,*44 Ohio Law Abs., 381, 65 N. E. (2d), 669; *City of Columbus*v. *Balzan,*38 Ohio Law Abs., 141, 49 N. E. (2d), 592; *State*v. *Smith,*33 Ohio Law Abs., 612, 35 N. E. (2d), 968.

Motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained.

*Motion sustained.*

Wiseman, P. J., Miller and Hornbeck, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION 

SOUTHSHORE RESTORE LLC; et al. ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) Judge Alonso 

 ) 

 v. ) Case No. 20 C 5264 

 ) 

ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL ) 

AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION; et al. ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

PLAINTIFFS’ EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER 

AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 

 Plaintiffs, by their attorneys, Loevy & Loevy, hereby move for a temporary 

restraining order and preliminary injunctive relief along the lines described in, and for 

all of the reasons set forth in, the accompanying Memorandum, which is expressly 

incorporated herein. 

 Respectfully Submitted: 

 /s/ Jon Loevy 

 Jon Loevy 

 Michael Kanovitz 

Loevy and Loevy (41295) 

311 North Aberdeen Street 

Chicago, IL 60607 

(312) 243-5900 

Case: 1:20-cv-05264 Document #: 5 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:102
**EXHIBIT32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

# SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of 1-800 CONTACTS, INC. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jonathan C. Coon, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best ofmy knowledge:

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

(2)          The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

This certificationaccompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
|   | /s/ Jonathan C. Coon    |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   | Date: May 10, 2007      |

 

----
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Harry L. DANTZLER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-7361.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 16, 2004.

Decided Dec. 23, 2004.

Harry L. Dantzler, Appellant pro se. John Michael Barton, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina; Michael Rhett DeHart, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Harry L. Dantzler seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability mil not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Dantzler has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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*
IN THE UNTED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

MICHAEL MARZETTE, individually and 

on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SP PLUS CORPORATION, a Delaware 

corporation,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:20-cv-05119

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF

VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF 

SP PLUS CORPORATION WITHOUT

PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO 

FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL 

PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)(i)

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff Michael Marzette (“Plaintiff”), pursuant to Fed.

R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), gives notice that he voluntarily dismisses all claims asserted against SP 

Plus Corporation (“Defendant”) in this action as to himself in his individual capacity without 

prejudice. Defendant has neither answered Plaintiff’s Complaint, nor filed a motion for summary 

judgment. Accordingly, the claims against Defendant may be dismissed without prejudice 

without an Order of the Court. 

Respectfully Submitted,

MICHAEL MARZETTE, individually and on 

behalf of all others similarly situated individuals,

Dated: November 6, 2020 By: /s/ Patrick H. Peluso

 One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys

Marc E. McCallister

mem@mccallisterlawgroup.com

McCallister Law Group

200 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2150

Chicago, IL 60601

(312) 345-0611

Steven L. Woodrow

swoodrow@woodrowpeluso.com

Case: 1:20-cv-05119 Document #: 18 Filed: 11/06/20 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:185
2

Patrick H. Peluso*

ppeluso@woodrowpeluso.com 

Woodrow & Peluso, LLC

3900 E. Mexico Avenue, Suite 300

Denver, Colorado 80210

Tel: 720-213-0675

Fax: 303-927-0809

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class

* Pro Hac Vice 

Case: 1:20-cv-05119 Document #: 18 Filed: 11/06/20 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:186
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and accurate copy of the above titled 

document was served upon counsel of record by filing such papers via the Court’s ECF system 

on November 6, 2020.

/s/ Patrick H. Peluso

Case: 1:20-cv-05119 Document #: 18 Filed: 11/06/20 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:187
EXHIBIT 32.1NOVELLUS SYSTEMS, INC.CERTIFICATIONIn connection with the periodic report of Novellus Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ended July 1, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),I, Richard S. Hill, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 ofthe United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge: (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, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for theperiods indicated.This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities and ExchangeCommission.        Dated: August 9, 2006 By:  /s/ Richard S. Hill    Richard S. Hill    Chairman of the Board of Directorsand Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 99.27




CONSENT OF KENNETH MEIKLE
 
  The undersigned hereby consents to reference to the undersigned’s name included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 40-F being filed by Mercator Minerals Ltd. with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with (1) the Preliminary Economic Assessment El Creston Project Opodepe, Sonora, Mexico dated December 16, 2010 (the “PEA Report”) and (2) the annual information form of the Corporation dated March 30, 2012, which includes reference to my name in connection with information relating to the PEA Report and the properties described therein.
  Date: March 30, 2012
 
  /s/ Kenneth Meikle



Kenneth Meikle, P.Eng.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 30, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
129106 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 129106 COA: 260292 Oakland CC: 2003-193604-FC MICHAEL DAVID VANCE, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to ap peal the May 26, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

K ELLY , J., would hold this case in abeyance for People v Drohan , lv gtd 472 Mich 881 (2005).

t0123 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 30, 2006

Clerk
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

ABC Corporation I et al, 

 Plaintiff,

v. 

THE PARTNERSHIPS and 

UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS 

IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE “A”, 

 Defendants.

CASE NO. 1: 20-cv-04806

Judge Honorable Thomas M. Durkin

Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Cole

DEFENDANT JIANGYOU’S STATEMENT 

PURSUANT TO COURT’S APRIL 06, 2022 ORDER AND LOCAL RULE 3.2 

Pursuant to Court’s April 06, 2022 Order (Dkt. 518) and Local Rule 3.2, Defendant Jiangyou-US 

(“Defendant” or “Jiangyou-US”), by its undersigned counsel, hereby submits the following statements: 

1. Defendant’s corporate name is Shenzhen Jiangyou Jinchukou Co., Ltd. (Shenzhen Jiangyou Import 

and Export Co., Ltd.). See Business License with English Translation attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 

2. Defendant is a Limited Liability Company incorporated in Shenzhen, China on December 25, 2019. 

3. Defendant’s legal representative is Wang Yiqiang. 

4. Defendant’s business address is 1201—04, No. 2000 Yousuowei Building, Jiaxian Road, Gangtou 

Community, Bantian Street, Longgang District, Shenzhen. 

5. As of April 27, 2022, there is no affiliates owning 5% or more of Defendant. 

6. Defendant never had contractual relationship with any other remaining defendants. 

7. Defendant has sufficient minimum contracts with the State of California to support jurisdiction. 

Date: April 27, 2022 

Respectfully Submitted: 

/s/ Tianyu Ju 

Tianyu Ju 

Iris.Ju@glacier.law 

He Cheng 

Robin.Cheng@glacier.law 

Tao Liu 

Case: 1:20-cv-04806 Document #: 522 Filed: 04/27/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:13728
2 

Tao.Liu@glacier.law 

Glacier Law LLP 

200 Park Avenue, Suite 1703 

New York, NY 10166 

(332) 208-8882 

Attorneys for Defendant

 

Case: 1:20-cv-04806 Document #: 522 Filed: 04/27/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:13729
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this April 27, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing file with 

the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, and service was perfected on all counsel of record and 

interested parties through this system, which will deliver a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

documents via CM/ECF. 

Date: 4/27/2022 

 

/s/ Tianyu Ju 

Tianyu Ju

Case: 1:20-cv-04806 Document #: 522 Filed: 04/27/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:13730
II 

Calendar No. 568 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3942 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 28, 2004 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

JUNE 7, 2004 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7 Commercial Boulevard in Middletown, 

Rhode Island, as the ‘‘Rhode Island Veterans Post Office 

Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION. 

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 7 Commercial Boulevard in Middletown, Rhode 

6 Island, is hereby redesignated as the ‘‘Rhode Island Vet7 erans Post Office Building’’. 
2 

•HR 3942 RS 

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

5 to the ‘‘Rhode Island Veterans Post Office Building’’. 

Calendar No. 568 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3942 

AN ACT 

To redesignate the facility of the United States 

Island Veterans Post Office Building’’. vard in Middletown, Rhode Island, as the ‘‘Rhode Postal Service located at 7 Commercial BouleJUNE 7, 2004 

Reported without amendment