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 Labor

###### Office of the Secretary 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

*Type of Review:*                         Reinstatement with change of a previously approved collection.                     

*Title of Collection:*                         National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979.                     

*OMB Control Number:*                         1220-0109.                     

*Affected Public:*                         Individuals or households.                     

*Total Estimated Number of Respondents:*                         14,560.                     

*Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours:*                         13,763.                     

*Total Estimated Annual Costs Burden:*                         $0.                     

*Description:*                         The information obtained in this survey will be used by the Department of Labor, other government agencies, academic researchers, the news media, and the general public to understand the employment experiences and life-cycle transitions of men and women born in the years 1957 to 1964 and living in the United States when the survey began in 1979. For additional information, see related notice published at Vol. 74 FR 17215 on April 14, 2009.                     

Darrin A. King, 

Departmental Clearance Officer.

 [FR Doc. E9-16600 Filed 7-13-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-24-P
#### John Begg and Agnes Begg Abrams v. E. H. Hoag.

No. 389. *

Practice, Courts or Appeals— *Vacation of Order of Arrest.*An order of the trial court vacating an order of arrest in a civil action, supported by competent evidence, will be regarded by an appellate court as a conclusive general finding in favor of the defendant as to the matter set forth in the affidavit for the order under which he was arrested.

Error from Harvey district court; F. L. Martin, judge.

Opinion filed November 14, 1898.

Affirmed.

*Bowman & Bucher,*for plaintiffs in error.

*B. H. Turner,*for defendant in error.

*562The opinion of the court was delivered by

Milton, J. :

The order of arrest under which the defendant in error was arrested in a civil action was vacated by the district court of Harvey county on motion of the defendant. Oral testimony was introduced at the hearing upon the motion. It.appears from a careful examination of the record that the-order of vacation is supported by competent evidence. It has, therefore, the force of a general finding in favor of the defendant as to all matters set forth in the affidavit for the order of arrest, and, as such, must be held conclusive .in this court. *(Bixby v.*Bailey, 11 Kan. 359; *Winstead v. Standeford,*21 id. 272.)

The order of the district court is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1241 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1241

  To expand the private right of action under the Telephone Consumer 
    Protection Act for calls in violation of the Do Not Call rules.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 30, 2019

  Mr. Durbin (for himself, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Markey, Ms. Duckworth, Ms. 
Klobuchar, and Ms. Smith) introduced the following bill; which was read 
     twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To expand the private right of action under the Telephone Consumer 
    Protection Act for calls in violation of the Do Not Call rules.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting American Consumers from 
Robocalls Act''.

SEC. 2. PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION FOR CALLS IN VIOLATION OF DO NOT CALL 
              RULES.

    Section 227(c)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
227(c)(5)) is amended--
            (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
        ``more than one telephone call within any 12-month period by or 
        on behalf of the same entity'' and inserting ``a telephone call 
        by or on behalf of an entity''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``up to''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 132 (Monday, July 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33476-33477]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16552]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice (09-064)]


Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public 
Law 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration announces a meeting of the Review of U.S. Human Space 
Flight Plans Committee. The agenda topics for the meeting include:
    <bullet> Johnson Space Center Perspective.
    <bullet> Constellation projects.
    <bullet> Committee subgroup report.
    <bullet> Public comment.

DATES: Tuesday, July 28, 2009, 10 a.m.-4 p.m. Note: All times listed 
are local times.

ADDRESSES: South Shore Harbour Resort & Conference Center, Crystal 
Ballroom Salon A & B, 2500 South Shore Blvd., League City, TX 77573, 
800-442-5005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Philip R. McAlister, Office of 
Program Analysis and Evaluation, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration, Washington, DC 20546. Phone 202-358-0712.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will be open to the public up to 
the seating capacity of the room. It is imperative that the meeting be 
held on this date to accommodate the

[[Page 33477]]

scheduling priorities of the key participants.

P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
 [FR Doc. E9-16552 Filed 7-10-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 627 Filed 10/20/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 49236
<PAGE>

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

            Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Medialink
Worldwide Incorporated (the "Company"), hereby certifies to such officer's
knowledge, that the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) 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.



Dated: March 28, 2003

                                               /s/ J. Graeme McWhirter
                                               -------------------------
                                               Name:  J. Graeme McWhirter
                                               Title: Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
<Page>



                                                                    Exhibit 10.3



                             TK INVESTOR RELATIONS
                                    GROUP INC                     [TK LOGO]


         8202 TURNBERRY STREET, WATERVIEW GOLF CLUB, ROWLETT, TX 75089
                 U.S.A.       WEBSITE:    www.tkirgroup.com



PROELITE
Attn. Mr. Bob Polsky
100 Dorigo Lane

Secaucus, NJ 07094                         Rowlett October 4th, 2001



Dear Bob

Following our conversation from yesterday we hereby confirm our Agreement as
follows:

We will raise USD 1,000,000 to cover your operating costs through one of our
investors. The Terms will be negotiated directly or through us. Confidentiality
coverage for both parties is Assumed to be agreed upon.
We will charge 10% commission for this transaction as agreed.

We will also provide you with Investor Relations and promotional work for you
Stock (Symbol PETE) Starting within the next few weeks.

For the Stock Promotion you will be charged 15% in Free Trading Stock, or cash
for the first 1 Mio shares of buying provided. After that the commission drops
down to 10% and you will be Reimbursed for the 5% additional paid for the first
1 Mio.

We usually charge USD 50,000 as a retainer in order to get started. However we
agreed on a transfer Of 300,000 shares Free trading stock into our account at
Investec Ernst out of which 50,000 shares will Be sold immediately to cover part
of the startup costs.

The remaining 250,000 will be as agreed upon partly used to pay for startup
cost up to USD 50,000 The rest will be accounted for against future commission
according to the 15% on the buying provided.

We hereby agree that we will keep you informed on where the first 250,000
shares go, for what it will be used etc. before we will sell or transfer it at
your convenience. We hereby irrevocably agree not to Use the free trading stock
provided as down payment coverage without your consent during the time Of our
agreement.

TK Investor Rotations Group Inc,                 PROELITE
(Thorsten H. Koster, President                   Bob Polsky

Dallas October 4th, 2001                         Seacaucus October 4th, 2001


/s/ [ILLEGIBLE]
-----------------------------------              -------------------------------




         TEL: (214) 607-0510 FAX: (214) 607-1502 EMAIL: tkirusa@aol.com
EXHIBIT 32.01





CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







I, Michael Neufeld, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Pegasi Energy Resources Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2012 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Pegasi Energy Resources Corporation.





By:

/s/ MICHAEL NEUFELDDate: August 14, 2012

Name:

Michael NeufeldTitle:

Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MARK MILLS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D2022-3159

[April 4, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Steven J. Levin, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562019CF002164. 

Olivia McBride Goodman, O’Brien Hatfield, P.A., Tampa, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Deborah Koenig, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, GERBER and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DiSTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

NEWARK VICINAGE

GREEN STRIPE, INC., tla Civil Action No. 10-6741 (DRD)G.S. DISTRIBUTION COMPANY

Plaintiff

v.

FOOD JUNG, INC.,BARBARA GINSBERG,

MARC GINSBERG, and

MICHAEL GINSBERG

Defendants

AMENDED ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WITH

TEMPORARY RESTRAINTS AND WITHOUT NOTICE

THIS MATTER having come before the Court on the application of Plaintiff Green

Stripe, Inc., t/a G.S. Distribution Company (“Plaintiff’) for an Amended Order to Show Cause

with Temporary Restraints and without Notice; and the Court having entered an Order to Show

Cause with Temporary Restraints and without Notice on December 23, 2010 (“the Original

OTSC”) [Doc. 3] after having reviewed the Complaint, the Memorandum of Law, the Affidavit

of Jane Stewart, Plaintiff’s Accounts Receivable Manager, and the Certification of Counsel

submitted therewith; and for gq caUse shown;

IT IS on this

day of , 20,
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure preliminarily enjoining the Defendants, their customers,agents, officers, subsidiaries, assigns, and banking institutions, from alienating, dissipating, payingover, or assigning any assets of Defendant Food King, Inc. (“Food King”), its subsidiaries or

related companies, except for payment to Plaintiff, until further order of this Court or untilDefendants pay Plaintiff the sum of $176,007.87 by cashier’s check or certified check (“the

Preliminary Injunction Hearing”); and it is further

ORDERED that Defendants shall file and serve any papers in advance of the Preliminary

Injunction Hearing by , 2Ojf_; and it is further

/

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file and serve any reply papers in advance of the

Preliminary Injunction Hearing by ,20jj_; and it is further

ORDERED that, pending the Preliminary Injunction Hearing, Defendants, their

customers, agents, officers, subsidiaries, assigns, arid banking institutions be, and hereby are,

TEMPORARILY RESTRAINEI) AND ENJOINED, pursuant to Ruie 65(b) of the FederalRules of Civil Procedure, from alienating, dissipating, paying over or assigning any assets of Food

King its subsidiaries or related companies, except for payment to Plaintiff; until further order of this

Court or until Defendants pay Plaintiff the sum of $176,007.87, as set forth above, by cashiers’

check or certified check (“the Temporary Restraints”); and it is further

ORI)ERED that no security or bond shall be required under Rule 65(c) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure because it appears that Defendants presently hold $176,007.87 worth of

Plaintiffs assets; and it is further

-7-
Honorable Dickinson R. Debevoise, U.SD.J.

-3-
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 the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [AA-11153-31; AK-965-1410-KC-P]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance.

# SUMMARY:

As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an appealable decision approving the reserved mineral estate in certain lands for conveyance pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and Sec. 12(b)(3) of the Act of January 2, 1976, will be issued to Cook Inlet Region, Inc. The lands are in the vicinity of Hicks and Pinochle Creeks, Alaska, and are located in:

## Seward Meridian, Alaska

T. 20 N., R. 9 E.,

Secs. 16, 19, and 20;

Secs. 21, 22, and 23;

Secs. 25 to 30, inclusive;

Sec. 35.

Containing 2,995.91 acres.

Notice of the decision will also be published four times in the Anchorage Daily News.

# DATES:

The time limits for filing an appeal are:

1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected by the decision shall have until August 12, 2009 to file an appeal.

2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal.

Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR part 4, subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights.

# ADDRESSES:

A copy of the decision may be obtained from: Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        The Bureau of Land Management by phone at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at                         *ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov.*                         Persons who use a telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management.                    

Christy Favorite,

Land Law Examiner, Land Transfer Adjudication II Branch.

[FR Doc. E9-16413 Filed 7-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
June 11, 2018

VIA ECF 

Justice Roberto A. Rivera-Soto (ret.)

Special Discovery Master

Ballard Spahr LLP

210 Lake Drive East, Suite 200

Cherry Hill, NJ 08002-1163

Re: Williams v. BASF Catalysts LLC, No. 11-1754

Dear Justice Rivera-Soto:

Plaintiffs have attached a copy of their appeal of Order on Cost Shifting 

regarding Interrogatory Nos. 9, 10 and 11 (CM/ECF # 560), which Plaintiffs filed 

on June 8, 2018. By letter dated that same day, Your Honor asked Plaintiffs to 

reply to BASF’s letter dated June 8, 2018, in which BASF requests the entry of a 

separate order denying Plaintiffs’ motion to compel due to their “refusal to pay the 

costs associated with BASF’s responses to Interrogatories 9, 10, and 11[.]” 

CM/ECF # 559, pg. 7.

Plaintiffs oppose BASF’s request because (1) your Honor granted Plaintiffs’ 

Motion, (2) the Order is now lodged in the District Court’s jurisdiction on the 

limited issue of cost-shifting, (3) we believe that the Special Discovery 

Master consequently does not have present jurisdiction over the Order, and (4) any 

further action by the Special Discovery Master on the Order must be held in 

abeyance pending the outcome on appeal. 

We also note that BASF’s letter misstates the tenor of the meet-and-confer. 

Plaintiffs had no understanding of what the costs would be, let alone that they 

would be in excess of $100,000, before the meet and confer. CM/ECF # 559, pg. 7. 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 562 Filed 06/11/18 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 40677
Justice Robert A. Rivera-Soto (ret.)

June 11, 2018

Page 2

Specifically, Plaintiffs went into the meet-and-confer conference to hear what 

BASF contended the costs would be. Plaintiffs raised the possibility of 

potential alternative productions, which BASF could perform at lower cost. In 

discussing potential alternatives, it is incorrect that Plaintiffs took the position that 

they “do not need the information they sought in interrogatories 9, 10 and 11, but 

would instead be willing to accept whatever information BASF has readily 

available that might serve as a “proxy.” CM/ECF # 559, pg. 4. Plaintiffs are 

entitled to the information they seek, in part because the Cahill database BASF has 

given to Plaintiffs was altered in such way that it impaired its ability to be a 

relational data base. The point was to have a discussion. BASF woodenly rejected 

any alternatives to provide information, contrary to the spirit of the meet-andconfer process.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Christopher M. Placitella

Christopher M. Placitella

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

and the Proposed Class

cc: Defense Counsel of Record (via ECF filing)

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 562 Filed 06/11/18 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 40678
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1335 

To eliminate the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 6, 2019 

Mr. CRUZ (for himself, Mr. LEE, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. SASSE, Mr. ROUNDS, Mrs. 

BLACKBURN, and Mr. PAUL) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 

Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To eliminate the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Repeal CFPB Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. REPEAL. 

6 The Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 

7 U.S.C. 5481 et seq.) is repealed, and the provisions of law 

8 amended or repealed by that Act are restored or revived 

9 as if the Act had not been enacted. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS