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 Commerce

          - [Docket No.: 140826721-4999-02]

# AGENCY:

Department of Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice; Commerce/Department-10, Executive Correspondence Files.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Commerce (Commerce) publishes this notice to announce the effective date of a Privacy Act System of Records entitled Commerce/Department-10, Executive Correspondence Files.

                        The notice of proposed amendment to this system of records was published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on October 14, 2014.                    

# DATES:

The system of records becomes effective on Dece mber 8, 2014.

# ADDRESSES:

For a copy of the system of records please mail requests to Brenda Dolan, Office of Privacy and Open Government, U.S. Department of Commerce, Suite A300, Room A326, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brenda Dolan, Office of Privacy and Open Government, 202-482-3258.

# SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:

 On October 14, 2014, the Department of Commerce published and requested comments on a proposed Privacy Act System of Records entitled Commerce/Department-10, Executive Correspondence Files (79 FR 61599). That notice informed the public that the Department of Commerce is updating: The categories of records in the system to include databases and electronic files; the system location(s); the routine uses to include the breach notification routine use; the safeguards and storage to include electronic records; the system manager(s) and addresses; the notification procedure; and the record source categories to include interaction with correspondent/Department contact. No comments were received in response to the request for comments. By this notice, the Department is adopting the proposed system as final without changes effective December 8, 2014.

Dated: December 2, 2014.

Brenda Dolan,

 Freedom of Information and Privacy Act Officer, U.S. Department of Commerce.

[FR Doc. 2014-28712 Filed 12-5-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-17-P
#### Stephen W. Duncombe, adm’r v. James S. Richards et ux.

[See 46 Mich. 166.]

*Gommismnm's' fees*— Taxation *of costs.*

Commissioners’ fees should be taxed in the lower court; and should not be taxed in gross.

Charges for copy and for the testimony of a party should not be allowed in taxing costs except upon a proper affidavit of disbursements.

*647Mandamus to compel re-taxation of costs.

Motion submitted on papers January 4, 1881.

Decided January 5.

Per Curiam.

*Mcmdctmus.*The taxation of commissioners’ fees in gross was improper. Besides they should have been taxed in the court below. The charges for briefs, if the several amounts were not too large, may stand. The charges of $10 for copy and $10 for testimony of Biehards should only have been allowed on a proper affidavit of disbursements.

Matter referred back to taxing officer.
#### Eddie Ray SPIVEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Stephen DEWALT; United States Parole Commission, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 01-6114.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 17, 2001.

Decided May 25, 2001.

Eddie Ray Spivey, pro se. Jerri Ulrica Dunston, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC, for appellees.

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Eddie Ray Spivey appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Spivey v. Dewalt,*No. CA-00-347-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Dec. 27, 2000). 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
11591.

#### LANIER *v.*THE STATE.

Decided July 14, 1920.

1. Where refusal to continue a case is complained of in a ground of a motion for a new trial, the showing made in support of the motion for a continuance should be set out in the ground or in an exhibit attached to it.

2. The rule as to simple larceny, that the thief may be indicted in any county into which he has carried the stolen goods (Penal Code of 1910, § 152), includes larceny of an automobile, although, under the act of 1916 (Ga. L. 1916, p. 154; Park’s Code Supp. 1917, Penal Div. § 187-1/2), larceny of an automobile is a felony.

Indictment for larceny of automobile; from Franklin superior court—Judge Hodges. April 19, 1920.

*Alexander S.*Johnson, for plaintiff in error.

*A. S.*Shelton, *solicitor-general,*contra.

Broyles, C. J.

1. Under repeated rulings of the Supreme Court and of this court, a special ground of a motion for a new trial must be complete and understandable within itself. In the instant case a special ground of the motion for a new trial is based upon the refusal of the court to grant a continuance on account of the absence of alleged material witnesses for -the defendant. The ground, however, fails to set out the showing made by the defendant in support of the motion, and it is not attached thereto as an exhibit. The ground, therefore, can not be considered.

*2.*
      **Simple larceny is the wrongful and fraudulent taking and carrying away, by any person, of the personal goods of another, with intent to steal the same. The thief may be indicted in any county into which he may carry the goods. Penal Code (1910), § 152.

(a) While, under the act of 1916 (Ga. L. 1916, p. 154; Park’s Penal Code Supp. (1917) § 183%), the stealing of an automobile is a felony, it remains (like cattle or hog-stealing, which also are felonies) simple larceny.

*(b)*Under the above ruling and the facts of the case, the defendant, was subject to indictment in the county of Franklin.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the .court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.*
Commonwealth of Virginia 

County of Fairfax 

General and Special Elections 

November 4, 2003 

SAMPLE BALLOT 

WINvote - Ballot Style 1 – screen 1 of 3 

Authorized by

Fairfax County Electoral Board 

12000 Government Center Parkway, Suite 323

Fairfax, Virginia 22035 

Phone: (703) 324-4735 or E-mail: elect@fairfaxcounty.gov 

Notice: The authority statement printed above must be removed and replaced with the appropriate authority statement

for the committee, individual or group using this ballot for their own purposes. The authority statement used for this ballot 

must comply with the requirements of both federal and state law. For state requirements, see §24.2-943 of the Code of 

Virginia. For federal requirements, call the Federal Elections Commission, 1-800-424-9530. 
Commonwealth of Virginia 

County of Fairfax 

General and Special Elections 

November 4, 2003 

SAMPLE BALLOT 

WINvote - Ballot Style 1 – screen 2 of 3 

Authorized by

Fairfax County Electoral Board 

12000 Government Center Parkway, Suite 323

Fairfax, Virginia 22035 

Phone: (703) 324-4735 or E-mail: elect@fairfaxcounty.gov 

Notice: The authority statement printed above must be removed and replaced with the appropriate authority statement

for the committee, individual or group using this ballot for their own purposes. The authority statement used for this ballot 

must comply with the requirements of both federal and state law. For state requirements, see §24.2-943 of the Code of 

Virginia. For federal requirements, call the Federal Elections Commission, 1-800-424-9530. 
Commonwealth of Virginia 

County of Fairfax 

General and Special Elections 

November 4, 2003 

SAMPLE BALLOT 

WINvote - Ballot Style 1 – screen 3 of 3 

Authorized by

Fairfax County Electoral Board 

12000 Government Center Parkway, Suite 323

Fairfax, Virginia 22035 

Phone: (703) 324-4735 or E-mail: elect@fairfaxcounty.gov 

Notice: The authority statement printed above must be removed and replaced with the appropriate authority statement

for the committee, individual or group using this ballot for their own purposes. The authority statement used for this ballot 

must comply with the requirements of both federal and state law. For state requirements, see §24.2-943 of the Code of 

Virginia. For federal requirements, call the Federal Elections Commission, 1-800-424-9530.
#### Catharine E. Holthoefer v. Caspar J. Holthoefer

[See ante, p. 360.]

*Petition foi' alimony pending appeal.*

'Where a bill for divorce filed by á wife has been dismissed and the complainant appeals, there should be a certificate that the appeal is in good faith, or a showing made by counsel to that effect, to support an application for alimony pending appeal. But it is not a matter of right in any such case.

*644Motion for allowance of alimony and counsel fee, pending; appeal.

Submitted October 4, 1881.

Decided October 5.

*Wisner dk Speed*for the motion.

*James T. Keena*against.
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-1839

___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v. Justin Michael Cinkan lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids

____________ Submitted: March 9, 2020 Filed: May 27, 2020 [Unpublished]

____________ Before ERICKSON, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. A jury convicted Justin Michael Cinkan on two counts of a three-count indictment: conspiracy to manufacture a controlled substance near a protected location in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846, and 860(a); and possession of pseudoephedrine with reasonable cause to believe it would be used to manufacturemethamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(c)(2). At sentencing, the district

court 1 applied a two-level enhancement based on Cinkan’s role in the offense as an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor under § 3B1.1(c) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”). But, because Cinkan was a career offender facing a maximum 80-year sentence, his offense level was automatically increased from 31 to 34, resulting in an advisory sentencing range of 262 to 327 months. The court granted Cinkan’s request for a downward variance and sentenced him to concurrent 180-month terms of imprisonment. Cinkan appeals, asserting that his acquittal on a different count necessarily means the jury found the evidence presented at trial was unreliable and not credible, and the court should not have considered it when determining whether a role enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 applied. While we are dubious of Cinkan’s argument, we need not resolve it because any legal error in applying the role enhancement is harmless since the court ultimately calculated a Guidelines range corresponding to Cinkan’s career-offender status. 2 See United States v. Wiggins, 747 F.3d 959, 963–64 (8th Cir. 2014) (concluding that any error in calculating drug quantity was harmless when the court found the defendant a career offender under the Guidelines). We affirm.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Leonard T. Strand, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.

2 The career-offender offense level is tied to the applicable statutory maximum penalty. U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. -2-
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                       18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Daniel P. Beharry, Chief Executive Officer of Mera Pharmaceuticals, certify
that (1) Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 3 (a) or 15 (d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2003 fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of Mera
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.







/S/ DANIEL P. BEHARRY
-----------------------
Daniel P. Beharry
Chief Executive Officer

March 15, 2004



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


<PAGE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NEBCO EVANS HOLDING COMPANY FOR THE SECOND
QUARTER ENDED JUNE 27, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-26-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-27-1998
<CASH>                                          50,971
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,301
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (26,854)
<INVENTORY>                                    264,990
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               649,537
<PP&E>                                         240,139
<DEPRECIATION>                                  61,129
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,886,906
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          705,035
<BONDS>                                        911,801
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    249,246
<COMMON>                                            82
<OTHER-SE>                                   (185,215)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,886,906
<SALES>                                      2,769,949
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,769,949
<CGS>                                        2,502,746
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,502,746
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               285,493
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              48,202
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (66,492)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       625
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (67,117)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (67,117)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

                            MICROPAC INDUSTRIES, INC.

                             CERTICATION 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  Micropac  Industries,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending  November 30, 2008 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Mark  King,  President  and Chief  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 results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Mark King
-------------------
Mark King, President and CEO
(Principal Executive Officer)
WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF OPTION ACCELERATION ON DECEMBER 9, 2005.



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 Written Description of Option Acceleration 
 Effectuated by the Compensation Committee 
 of the Board of Directors of KVH Industries, Inc. 
 on December 9, 2005 
  
 On December 9, 2005, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of KVH Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) voted to accelerate the
vesting of all stock options that (i) were issued by the Company and outstanding on that date under the Company’s Amended and Restated 1996 Incentive and Nonqualified Stock Option Plan and 2003 Incentive and Nonqualified Stock Option Plan
and (ii) had exercise prices equal to or greater than ten percent (10%) above the closing price of the common stock of the Company on December 8, 2005, as reported by the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. On such date, the closing market
price was $9.93. 
  
 As a result of this acceleration, all such
stock options became immediately exercisable in full but otherwise continued to have all of the same terms and conditions as immediately before the acceleration, including the same exercise price and termination date. 
  
 The acceleration of vesting extended to all holders of stock options that met
the foregoing criteria, including any directors and executive officers of the Company who held such stock options.
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4589 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 22, 2004 

Received 

AN ACT 

To reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families 

block grant program through September 30, 2004, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

HR 4589 RDS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘TANF and Related 

3 Programs Continuation Act of 2004’’. 

4 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF THE TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR 

5 NEEDY FAMILIES BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM 

6 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2004. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Activities authorized by part A of 

8 title IV of the Social Security Act, and by sections 510, 

9 1108(b), and 1925 of such Act, shall continue through 

10 September 30, 2004, in the manner authorized for fiscal 

11 year 2002, notwithstanding section 1902(e)(1)(A) of such 

12 Act, and out of any money in the Treasury of the United 

13 States not otherwise appropriated, there are hereby appro14 priated such sums as may be necessary for such purpose. 

15 Grants and payments may be made pursuant to this au16 thority through the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 at 

17 the level provided for such activities through the fourth 

18 quarter of fiscal year 2002. 

19 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 

20 403(a)(3)(H)(ii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

21 603(a)(3)(H)(ii)) is amended by striking ‘‘June 30’’ and 

22 inserting ‘‘September 30’’. 
3 

HR 4589 RDS 

1 SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF THE NATIONAL RANDOM SAMPLE 

2 STUDY OF CHILD WELFARE AND CHILD WEL3 FARE WAIVER AUTHORITY THROUGH SEP4 TEMBER 30, 2004. 

5 Activities authorized by sections 429A and 1130(a) 

6 of the Social Security Act shall continue through Sep7 tember 30, 2004, in the manner authorized for fiscal year 

8 2002, and out of any money in the Treasury of the United 

9 States not otherwise appropriated, there are hereby appro10 priated such sums as may be necessary for such purpose. 

11 Grants and payments may be made pursuant to this au12 thority through the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 at 

13 the level provided for such activities through the fourth 

14 quarter of fiscal year 2002. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 22, 2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.1

 

**                                                THE MONARCH CEMENT COMPANY                                                   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 this Amendment No. 1 of The MonarchCement Company (the "Company") onForm 10-K/A for the year ended December 31,2008, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the datehereof(the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicatedbelow, hereby certifiespursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

(1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to The MonarchCement Company and will be retained by The MonarchCement Company and furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

Dated:  March 18, 2009

|   |   | /s/ Walter H. Wulf, Jr.               |   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Walter H. Wulf, Jr.    President and     Chairman of the Board                                         |   |
<PAGE>   1


                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-31700) pertaining to the MSI Holdings, Inc. 2000 Stock Option
Plan and the Registration Statements (Form S-3 No. 333-31726 and 333-92413) of
MSI Holdings, Inc. and the related Prospectus' of our report dated June 26,
2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of MSI Holdings,
Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended March 31,
2000, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

                                             /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Austin, Texas
June 26, 2000
Exhibit 23.1**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**
        We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-19011, No. 333-71373, No. 333-42276, No. 333-45534, No.333-73652, No. 333-89176, and No. 333-141458), and on Form S-3 (No. 333-138023, No. 333-134666, No. 333-130977,No. 333-130423, No. 333-129141, No. 333-128020, No. 333-128019, No. 333-123902, No. 119645, No. 333-102244,  No.333-76432 No. 333-69652 No. 333-33612, No. 333-89257, No. 333-84587, No. 333-81311, No. 333-79753, No. 333-76395, andNo. 333-141454, 333-141455, 333-156393 and 333-110181) of Microvision, Inc. of our report dated March 5, 2009relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule, and the effectieness of internal controlover financial reporting, which appears in ths Form 10-K.
/s/  PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Seattle, Washington