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

Calendar No. 666

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4327

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 7, 2004

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

JULY 22, 2004

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 7450 Natural Bridge Road in St. Louis, Missouri, as the ‘‘Vitilas ‘Veto’ Reid 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. DESIGNATION. 

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 7450 Natural Bridge Road in St. Louis, Missouri, 

6 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Vitilas ‘Veto’ Reid 

7 Post Office Building’’. 
2

•HR 4327 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 ‘‘Vitilas ‘Veto’ Reid Post Office Building’’. 

Calendar No. 666

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4327

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office Building’’. in St. Louis, Missouri, as the ‘‘Vitilas ‘Veto’ Reid al Service located at 7450 Natural Bridge Road 

JULY 22, 2004

Reported without amendment
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7491

STEPHEN SINGS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

REGGIE WEISNER,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western of

North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District

Judge. (CA-05-110-3)

Submitted: December 15, 2005 Decided: December 22, 2005

Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stephen Sings, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Stephen Sings, a North Carolina prisoner, seeks to appeal

the district court’s order dismissing his petition filed under 28

U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) as untimely under the Antiterrorism and

Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. An appeal may not be taken

from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

for claims addressed by a district court 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 the district court’s assessment of his

constitutional claims is debatable or wrong 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

(2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee,

252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed

the record and conclude that Sings has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny his motion for a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
- 3 -

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

         In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Mediscience
Technology Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February
29, 2008 (the "Report"), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, hereby
certifies that to such officer's knowledge:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. ss.78o(d)); and

         (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: June 12, 2008
                                            By:      /s/ Peter Katevatis
                                                --------------------------------
                                                     Peter Katevatis
                                                     Chief Executive Officer

Dated: June 12, 2008
                                            By:      /s/ Frank D. Benick
                                                --------------------------------
                                                     Frank D. Benick
                                                     Chief Financial Officer

         The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss.1350) and is not being filed as
part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.01
 
                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
 
     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference in this Registration Statement on Form S-4 of our report dated
January 23, 1998 included in Crescent Real Estate Equities Company's Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 1997, and of our reports dated August 29, 1997
on U.S. Home Building, December 4, 1997 on Energy Centre, December 12, 1997 on
Austin Centre January 16, 1998 on Post Oak Central, January 16, 1998 on
Washington Harbour and March 4, 1998 on Datran Center included in Crescent Real
Estate Equities Company's Forms 8-K and to all references to our Firm included
in this Registration Statement.
 
                                            ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
 
Dallas, Texas
June 24, 1998
##### 



EXHIBIT 21
 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF MENTOR CORPORATION
  Subsidiary
    
    State of Incorporation or
OrganizationByron Medical, Inc.
    
    ArizonaInform Solutions Inc.
    
    CaliforniaMDI Company Ltd.
    
    BermudaMentor Aesthetics B.V.
    
    NetherlandsMentor Benelux B.V.
    
    NetherlandsMentor Biologics, Inc.
    
    WisconsinMentor Biopolymers Limited
    
    United KingdomMentor Deutschland GmbH
    
    GermanyMentor International Holdings Alpha, Inc.
    
    DelawareMentor International Holdings Beta, Inc.
    
    DelawareMentor International Holdings Camda, Inc.
    
    DelawareMentor International Holdings Delta, Inc.
    
    DelawareMentor Medical Inc.
    
    DelawareMentor Medical Italia, S.r.l.
    
    ItalyMentor Medical Systems (Canada), Inc.
    
    CanadaMentor Medical Systems B.V.
    
    NetherlandsMentor Medical Systems Ltd. (U.K.)
    
    EnglandMentor Medical Systems Pty. Ltd.
    
    AustraliaMentor Medical Systems, C.V.
    
    NetherlandsMentor Medical Systems, France, S.A.
    
    FranceMentor Medical Systems, Iberica, S.L.
    
    SpainMentor Minnesota Inc. (Formerly Mentor Urology, Inc.)
    
    DelawareMentor Texas GP, LLC
    
    DelawareMentor Texas LP (Formerly Mentor H/S, Inc).
    
    DelawareMentor Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (Formerly Mills Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.)
    
    OklahomaMelene Corporation (Formerly Selene Corporation)
    
    California
10746, 10773.

#### Central of Georgia Railway Co. *v.*Bibb Brick Company; and *vice versa.*

Decided December 23, 1919.

(Certiorari granted by the Supreme Court.)

Appeal; from Bibb superior court—Judge Mathews. July 1, 1919.

*T. 8. Felder, B. C. Jordan,*for plaintiff.

*John B. L. Smith, Grady G. Harris,*for defendant.

Smith, J.

1. “A party who is dissatisfied with the award in condemnation proceedings which have been instituted to assess the damages to private property taken for public use, and who desires to appeal from-the decision of the assessors to the superior court, is not required to give bond for the eventual condemnation money as in case of other appeals.” *Alderman*v. *Valdosta &c. R. Co.,*9 *Ga. App.*526 (71 S. E. 931).

2. Where, in condemnation proceedings instituted to assess the damage to private property taken for public use, the condemnor desires to appeal from the decision of the assessors to the superior court, an appeal entered by the attorneys at law for the condemnor is good in law. Civil Code (1910), § 4955.

3. Under the above rulings the court erred in dismissing the appeal.

*Judgment reversed on the main hill of exceptions, and affirmed on the. cross-hill.*

*Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM NB CAPITAL
CORPORATION'S UNAUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 2000 AND UNAUDITED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 INCLUDED IN NB CAPITAL
CORPORATION'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2000
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001049551
<NAME>                        NB CAPITAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     Canadian Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                          66,263,393
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  419,725,816
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               485,989,209
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 485,989,209
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              350,791
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                          3,001
<COMMON>                                                 1
<OTHER-SE>                                     485,638,418
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   485,989,209
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,560,267
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   379,209
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,181,058
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,181,058
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,181,058
<EPS-BASIC>                                         29,104
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       29,104





</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE JULY 31,
1996 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1996
<CASH>                                          50,046
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  471,279
<ALLOWANCES>                                    51,402
<INVENTORY>                                    457,862
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               953,320
<PP&E>                                         128,400
<DEPRECIATION>                                  20,146
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,163,811
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          177,820
<BONDS>                                        404,328
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           352
<OTHER-SE>                                     475,906
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,163,811
<SALES>                                      1,137,377
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,137,377
<CGS>                                          576,764
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  576,764
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                53,508
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              30,102
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 70,088
<INCOME-TAX>                                    25,094
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             44,994
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,096)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    43,898
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.25<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.20<F1>
<FN>
<F1>The amount reported for EPS primary and fully diluted is in compliance with
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 128, "Earnings Per Share," and
represents the Basic and Diluted calculation as required by this standard.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
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 Mexco Energy Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the SEC on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nicholas C. Taylor, President and Chief Executive
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 results of operations of the
      Company.


Dated: June 29, 2005                    /s/ Nicholas C. Taylor
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       48
<Page>

                                                                   Exhibit 4.1


[DELOITTE LOGO]


         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form F-80 of our
report dated February 3, 2005 relating to the consolidated financial
statements of Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc. and
its segregated funds (which audit report expresses an unqualified opinion and
includes a separate report titled Comments by Independent Registered
Chartered Accountants for U.S. Readers on Canada-United States of America
Reporting Differences relating to changes in accounting principles and a
restatement of the 2003 financial statements).

/s/ Samson Belair / Deloitte & Touche s.e.n.c.r.l.
Independent Registered Chartered Accountants
Quebec, Quebec, Canada

November 18, 2005
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d), as applicable, 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.

 

 

| May 12, 2008

  | By: /s/ | Richard T. Mason                  |
|----------------------|---------|---------------------------------------------|
| (Date)

        |    | Richard T. Mason

President

 

  |

 

 

----
10899.

#### Sayler *v.*The State.

Decided November 4, 1919.

Conviction of shooting at another; from Sumter superior court— Judge Littlejohn. August 5, 1919.

*Mixon & Pace,*for plaintiff in error.

*Jule Felton, solicitor-general,*contra.

BloodWoeth, J.

The special grounds of the motion for new trial are devoid of merit. There is evidence sufficient to support the verdict, which has the approval of the trial judge; and the judgment is

*Affirmed.*

*Broyles, G. J., and Luke, J., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       3,782,941               6,305,094
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,286,859               3,138,497
<ALLOWANCES>                                    78,000                  78,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,037,611               9,665,575
<PP&E>                                       2,229,121               2,364,726
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,513,267               1,617,390
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,901,890              35,559,778
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,743,367               9,258,510
<BONDS>                                     32,383,143              31,388,143
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                     5,162,281               5,463,631
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,188,699               3,378,044
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                36,901,890              35,559,778
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            49,455,419              28,984,959
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               32,439,092              18,203,681
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            11,800,965               8,841,641
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,111,995               1,803,750
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,293,889                 303,370
<INCOME-TAX>                                    60,000                  14,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,233,889                 289,370
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.6
 
              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
 
     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus
constituting part of this Registration Statement on Form S-3 of Clear Channel
Communications, Inc. of our report dated November 3, 1997 relating to the
financial statements of Paxson Radio (a division of Paxson Communications
Corporation) included in Clear Channel Communications, Inc.'s Current Report on
Form 8-K dated December 22, 1997. We also consent to the reference to us under
the heading "Experts" in such Prospectus.
 

/s/ PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP
----------------------------------------
 
Price Waterhouse LLP
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
May 4, 1998
Uniform Laws and Regulations

in the areas of legal metrology and

engine fuel quality

as adopted by the 96th

National Conference on

Weights and Measures 2011

NIST Handbook

2012

130
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 Quarterly Report of Innovative Solutions and Support, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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/    GEOFFREY S. M. HEDRICK                                           
|                                                                        
|Geoffrey S. M. Hedrick Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer



|                                       
|---------------------------------------
|February 3, 2004                       
|                                       
|/s/    JAMES J. REILLY                 
|                                       
|James J. Reilly Chief Financial Officer



February 3, 2004
10157.

#### Strickland *v.*Strickland.

Decided September 20, 1919.

Levy and claim; from Gordon superior court—Judge Tarver. August 27, 1918.

*Stair & Paschall, Maddox, McCamy & Shumate,*for plaintiff in error.

*Marie Bolding, P. A. Cantrell,*contra.

Peb Curiam.

Where a constable is specially deputized by the sheriff and sworn in for the purpose of serving a particular writ, he becomes a de facto deputy sheriff, and service by him is legal. *Twiggs*v. *Hardwick,*61 *Ga.*273; *Hinton*v. *Lindsay,*20 *Ga.*746; *Blount*v. *Wells,*55 *Ga.*282. See also *Hartshorn*v. *Bank,*15 *Ga. App.*173 (82 S. E. 805), where it is held that when a constable, although irregularly appointed or qualified as a deputy sheriff, *assumes*to act as a lawful deputy sheriff, his acts are those of a de facto officer, and therefore legal.

The court did not err in refusing to dismiss the levy:

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., Bloodioorth and Stephens, Jj., concur.*