alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.
 Federal Communications Commission
 The FCC Sunshine Notice dated 10-15-09 inadvertently failed to include the following language: The Commission waives the Sunshine Period Prohibition on ex parte contacts with the Commission to the extent that those contacts are made through the Open Internet Blog, 
                    *http://blog.openinternet.gov.*
                     Such contacts take place in a forum that is both instantaneously available to all interested parties and will not intrude on the Commission's decision making. The Federal Communications Commission will hold an Open Meeting on the subject listed below on Thursday, October 22, 2009, which is scheduled to commence at 10:00 a.m. in Room TW-C305, at 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. Item No.
Bureau
SubjectWIRELINE COMPETITION & WIRELESS TELE-COMMUNICATIONS
TITLE: Preserving the Open Internet; Broadband Industry Practices (WC Docket No. 07-52) SUMMARY: The Commission will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on policies to preserve the open Internet.
 Additional information concerning this meeting may be obtained from Audrey Spivack or David Fiske, Office of Media Relations, (202) 418-0500; TTY 1-888-835-5322. Audio/Video coverage of the meeting will be broadcast live with open captioning over the Internet from the FCC's Audio/Video Events web page at 
                    *www.fcc.gov/​live.* Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary.


[FR Doc. E9-25397 Filed 10-19-09; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE  6712-01-S
#### In the Matter of Gent Uniform Rental Corp., Appellant, v County of Suffolk Department of Labor, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Gent Uniform Rental Corp., Appellant, v County of Suffolk et al., Respondents. (Proceeding No. 2.)

Decided September 23, 2010

Appeal, insofar as taken from that part of the Appellate Division order that affirmed so much of Supreme Court’s order and judgment as dismissed the proceeding in *Matter of Gent Uniform Rental Corp. v County of Suffolk,*dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that, as to that part of the order, no substantial constitutional question is directly involved; appeal otherwise dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the remainder of the Appellate Division order does not finally determine the proceedings within the meaning of the Constitution.
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 Gexa Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003 (the "Report"), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Marcie Zlotnik,
President 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, as amended; and

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

---------------------------------
Marcie Zlotnik
President
Dated: May 12, 2003
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2544 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain men’s wading boots, valued 

over $30/pair, with textile outer soles and uppers of leather or composition leather whose height from the bottom of the outer sole to the 

top of the upper does not exceed 9 inches (22.86 cm). 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 30, 2009 

Ms. CANTWELL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain men’s wading 

boots, valued over $30/pair, with textile outer soles and 

uppers of leather or composition leather whose height 

from the bottom of the outer sole to the top of the 

upper does not exceed 9 inches (22.86 cm). 

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


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2544 IS

1 SECTION 1. CERTAIN MEN’S WADING BOOTS, VALUED OVER 

2 $30/PAIR, WITH TEXTILE OUTER SOLES AND 

3 UPPERS OF LEATHER OR COMPOSITION 

4 LEATHER WHOSE HEIGHT FROM THE BOT5 TOM OF THE OUTER SOLE TO THE TOP OF 

6 THE UPPER DOES NOT EXCEED 9 INCHES 

7 (22.86 CM). 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

9 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

10 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

11 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Men’s wading boots, valued 

over $30/pair, with textile 

outer soles and uppers of 

leather or composition leather 

whose height from the bottom 

of the outer sole to the top of 

the upper does not exceed 9 

inches (22.86 cm) (provided 

for in subheading 

6405.10.00) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

13 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

14 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

15 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 203 (Thursday, October 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 54601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25418]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11886 and <greek-i>11887]


Georgia Disaster Number GA-00027

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION:  Amendment 3.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Georgia (FEMA--1858--DR), dated 09/24/
2009.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding.
    Incident Period: 09/18/2009 and continuing through 10/08/2009.
    Effective Date: 10/08/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/23/2009.
    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/24/2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for the State of Georgia, dated 09/24/2009 is hereby 
amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 
09/18/2009 and continuing through 10/08/2009.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-25418 Filed 10-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
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 Arête Industries, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John Herzog, Interim Chief Financial 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 result of operations of the Company.







January 19, 2011
By:
/s/ John HerzogJohn Herzog, Interim Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Arête Industries, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 Westford Technology Ventures, L.P.
(the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Jeffery T. Hamilton, Chief Executive Officer of the Partnership,
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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



/s/      Jeffrey T. Hamilton
Jeffery T. Hamilton
President, Hamilton Capital Management, Inc.

August 12, 2003
#### In the Matter of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Respondent, v Fiduciary Insurance Company of America, Appellant.

[974 NYS2d 560]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to confirm an arbitration award, Fiduciary Insurance Company of America appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Sher, J.), dated July 24, 2012, as denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate a judgment of the same court dated August 8, 2011, which was entered upon its default in answering or appearing and was in favor of the petitioner and against it in the principal sum of $22,987.51, and, thereupon, to release funds held on levy.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (hereinafter Liberty Mutual) commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to confirm an arbitration award it obtained against Fiduciary Insurance Company of America (hereinafter FICA), which did not appear for the arbitration. Upon FICA’s failure to oppose the petition, and to appear in court on the adjourned return date, despite awareness of the appearance date, judgment was entered against FICA in the principal sum of the arbitration award, plus costs and disbursements. Almost 10 months later, after a levy was placed upon its assets, FICA moved, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate the judgment entered upon its default. The Supreme Court denied the motion.

*732To obtain relief from its default pursuant CPLR 5015 (a) (1), FICA was required to show both a reasonable excuse for the default and a potentially meritorious defense to the petition *(see Needleman v Tornheim,*106 AD3d 707, 708 [2013]; *Walker v Mohammed,*90 AD3d 1034 [2011]). While FICA offered an excuse for its failure to appear for the arbitration — i.e., its belief that the matter had settled — it did not proffer any excuse for its failure, after having learned that Liberty Mutual obtained a favorable arbitration award against it, to oppose the petition to confirm the award and to appear in court on the petition *(see Arias v First Presbyt. Church in Jamaica,*100 AD3d 940, 941 [2012]; *Bethune v Prioleau,*82 AD3d 810, 810-811 [2011]). Nor did FICA explain why it waited almost 10 months, until a levy was placed on its assets, to make the instant motion *(see Vardaros v Zapas,*105 AD3d 1037, 1038 [2013]; *Desiderio v Devani,*24 AD3d 495, 496 [2005]). In view of the lack of a reasonable excuse, it is unnecessary to consider whether FICA demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense to the petition *(see Vardaros v Zapas,*105 AD3d at 1038; *Maida v Lessing’s Rest. Servs., Inc.,*80 AD3d 732 [2011]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying FICA’s motion. Skelos, J.P, Balkin, Lott and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Full House Resorts, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Andre M. Hilliou,
Chief Executive Officer of Full House Resorts, Inc., hereby 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 Full House Resorts, Inc.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: April 8, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/ ANDRE M. HILLIOU   
|                     |  |     |  | Andre M. Hilliou       
|                     |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer



CERTIFICATION OF
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Full House Resorts, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) I, James Meier, Chief Financial Officer of Full House Resorts, Inc., hereby 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 Full House Resorts, Inc.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: April 8, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/ JAMES MEIER        
|                     |  |     |  | James Meier            
|                     |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer
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 Boston Financial Tax Credits Fund VII
(the "Fund") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer,
hereby certifies 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
     Partnership.



                                     /s/Jenny Netzer
                                     ------------------------------------
                                     Jenny Netzer
                                     Principal Executive Officer and
                                     Principal Financial Officer
                                     Arch Street VIII, Inc. as
                                     Managing General Partner of
                                     Boston Financial Tax Credits Fund VII


                                     Date:  July 13, 2005


A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has been
provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### September 26, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 131416 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: 131416 COA: 268913 Washtenaw CC: 03-000186-FH JEREMY DANIEL SCHUH, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the April 19, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

p0918 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.

September 26, 2006

Clerk
The District Court of the 4th Judicial District. County of Missoula.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. ANDREW BAGLEY, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-08-577 DECISION

On December 9, 2009, the defendant was as follows: Count I: Twenty (20) years in the Montana State Prison, with five (5) years suspended, to run consecutive to the in-custody portion of the sentences in DC-05-383 and DC-07-206, for the offense of Robbery, a felony; Count II: Twenty (20) years in the Montana State Prison, all suspended, to run consecutive to Count I, for the offense of Robbery, a felony; Count III: Ten (10) years in the Montana State Prison, all suspended, to run consecutive to Counts I and II, for the offense of Robbery, a felony; Count IV: Twenty (20) years in the Montana State Prison, all suspended, to run concurrent with Count I, for the offense of Robbery, a felony; Count V: Twenty (20) years in the Montana State Prison, all suspended, to run concurrent with Count I, for the offense of Robbery, a felony; Counts VI. VII. VIII. IX and X: Five (5) years in the Montana State Prison, all suspended, on each Count, to run concurrent with Count I, for the offenses of Criminal Possession of Dangerous Drugs/Opitate/Meth, all felonies.

On May 6,2010, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant was present and was represented by Kara Docherty. The state was represented by Andrew Paul, who appeared via videoconference.

Before hearing the application, the defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

Rule 17 of the Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana provides that “the sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct, and the sentence will not be reduced or increased unless it is deemed clearly inadequate or excessive.” (§46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is inadequate or excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division *35that the sentence shall be affirmed.

Done in open Court this 6th day of May, 2010.

DATED this 26th day of May, 2010.

Chairperson, Hon. Blair Jones, Member, Hon. Richard Simonton and Member, Hon. Ray Dayton.
#### Robert H. Hamilton et al., Respondents, v David Murphy, Appellant.

Submitted January 3, 2011;

decided February 24, 2011

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
**EXHIBIT 23.01**
**CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**
We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated December17, 2001, with respect to the financial statements of Martek BiosciencesCorporation included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year endedOctober 31, 2001, in the following Registration Statements:
     Registration Statement Number 33-79222 on Form S-8, dated May 23, 1994
     Registration Statement Number 33-93580 on Form S-3, dated June 16, 1995
     Registration Statement Number 333-27671 on Form S-8, dated May 22, 1997
     Registration Statement Number 333-46949 on Form S-8, dated February 26, 1998
     Registration Statement Number 333-84317 on Form S-8, dated August 2, 1999
     Registration Statement Number 333-34460 on Form S-3, dated November 13, 2000
     Registration Statement Number 333-52298 on Form S-8, dated December 20, 2000
     Registration Statement Number 333-57176 on Form S-3, dated March 28, 2001
     Registration Statement Number 333-74092 on Form S-8, dated November 28, 2001
                                                                                                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
McLean, Virginia
No. 872.

#### Georgia *v.*Evans et al.

March 2, 1942.

*Mr. Ellis Arnall,*Attorney General of Georgia, for petitioner. *Messrs. Hal Lindsay, Felix T. Smith, B. B. Taylor, Barry Wright, Allen Post,*and *Marion Smith*for respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted.
## Contact Information

Bethesda MD20814

juanita.cooper@nih.gov

July 2020

Back to Top
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 Columbia Laboratories, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Lawrence A. Gyenes, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer 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 to the best of my knowledge:





(3)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(4)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.








/s/ Lawrence A. Gyenes


Lawrence A. Gyenes


Senior Vice President-


Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer


August 6, 2009