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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of notice required under 39 U.S.C. 3642(d)(1):*                         September 12, 2017.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on September 6, 2017, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 352 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2017-188, CP2017-289.                

Elizabeth A. Reed,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2017-19273 Filed 9-11-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### Steven E. TARPLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James REILLY, Clerk, et al., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 07-7093.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 9, 2008.

Decided: Jan. 24, 2008.

Steven E. Tarpley, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Steven E. Tarpley appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Tarpley v. Reilly,*No. 1:06-cv-00365-BEL (D.Md. July 12, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED. '*
Exhibit 99.1




Annual Servicer’s Certificate


Provided by Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation


to Holders of Notes and Certificates









NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION




OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE




The undersigned, Michael J. McConnell, Vice-President of NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, a California corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, in his capacity as an Authorized Officer of the Company:






(1)           The undersigned has caused a review, under his supervision, to be made of:  i) the activities; and ii) the performance under the Agreement, of the Company during the period from May 23, 2013 through March 31, 2014 (the “Reporting Period”); and






(2)           To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, based upon such review, i) the Company has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects during the Reporting Period; and ii) no Servicer Default has occurred.






This Officer’s Certificate is being furnished pursuant to (i) Section 3.01(c) of the Servicing Agreement, as may be amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, dated as of March 1, 1999, by and among Nissan-Infiniti LT, NILT Trust, as UTI Beneficiary, and the Company, as Servicer; and (ii) Section 8.11(b) of the 2013-A SUBI Servicing Supplement, dated as of May 23, 2013, by and among Nissan-Infiniti LT, as Titling Trust, NILT Trust, as Grantor and UTI Beneficiary, and the Company, as Servicer (the “Agreement”).






Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meaning assigned to them in the Agreement.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand effective as of the 16th day of June, 2014.




/s/ Michael J. McConnell________________


Michael J. McConnell


Vice President
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 20 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 285
114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 20

  Relating to the approval of the proposed Agreement for Cooperation 
Between the United States of America and the Government of the Republic 
          of Korea Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 28, 2015

  Mr. Cardin (by request) introduced the following joint resolution; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

                            October 29, 2015

    Committee discharged pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2159(i) and Section 
       601(b)(4) of Public Law 94-329, and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Relating to the approval of the proposed Agreement for Cooperation 
Between the United States of America and the Government of the Republic 
          of Korea Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress does favor 
the proposed agreement for cooperation transmitted to the Congress by 
the President on June 16, 2015.

                                                       Calendar No. 285

114th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                             S. J. RES. 20

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

  Relating to the approval of the proposed Agreement for Cooperation 
Between the United States of America and the Government of the Republic 
          of Korea Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            October 29, 2015

    Committee discharged pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2159(i) and Section 
       601(b)(4) of Public Law 94-329, and placed on the calendar
```
**Exhibit
      32.1**





CERTIFICATION
      OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Annual Report of ATSI Communications, Inc. on Form 10-QSB
      for the period ending October 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Arthur L. Smith, President and Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C, ss. 1350,
      as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,





1)
            the
                Report complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
                the
                Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
            the
                information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
                the
                financial condition and result of operations of the
                Company.





By
      /s/
      Arthur L. Smith


Arthur
      L.
      Smith


President
      and


Chief
      Executive Officer


December
      14, 2007
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 17, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-40512 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ANGEL SILVESTRE ARELLANO-RIOS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-50-1

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Angel Silvestre Arellano-Rios pleaded guilty to being an alien unlawfully found in the United States after deportation, having previously been convicted of an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). The district court sentenced him to serve 87 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. For the first time on appeal, Arellano-Rios argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions set forth in 8 U.S.C.No. 04-40512 -2- § 1326(b) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000), because they do not require the fact of a prior felony or aggravated felony conviction to be charged in the indictment and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. As Arellano-Rios concedes, his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 234-35 (1998). See United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). Arellano-Rios also argues for the first time on appeal that if Almendarez-Torres is overruled, the Supreme Court’s holding in Blakely v. Washington , 124 S. Ct. 2531, 2537 (2004), renders unconstitutional the district court’s calculation of his sentence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines based on facts relating to his prior convictions that were neither found by ajury beyond a reasonable doubt nor admitted by him. ArellanoRios concedes that in addition to the obstacle posed by Almendarez-Torres , his argument regarding the effect of Blakely is foreclosed by United States v. Pineiro , 377 F.3d 464, 465-66 (5th Cir. 2004), petition for cert. filed (U.S. July 14, 2004) (No. 04-5263), in which this court held that Blakely does not extend to the United States Sentencing Guidelines.
AFFIRMED.
#### GERDA GARTNER v. HOGSTAD FISH COMPANY AND ANOTHER.3

July 15, 1949.

No. 35,016.

*598*Thorwald Hansen*and *Fred F. Weddel,*for relator.

*Shepley, Severson & Johnson,*for respondents.

3

 Reported in 38 N. W. (2d) 844.

Thomas Gallagher, Justice.

Respondents move to have the writ of certiorari issued herein discharged. It was issued by this court on May 17, 1949, for the purpose of reviewing two orders of the industrial commission, one dated and served January 28, 1949, and the other dated and served March 18, 1949. The order of January 28, 1949, denied relator compensation; the order of March 18, 1949, denied relator’s petition for reargument.

On April 18, 1949, this court granted relator an extension of time in which to serve a writ of certiorari on the industrial commission. The writ subsequently issued was within the time thus extended.

M. S. A. 176.61 provides that a writ of certiorari to review an order of the industrial commission must be applied for within *30 days*after service of the commission’s order. We have held that a writ of certiorari may not be issued subsequent to such prescribed 30-day period. State ex rel. Virginia & Rainy Lake Co. v. Bashko, 127 Minn. 519, 148 N. W. 1082; Lickfett v. Jorgenson, 179 Minn. 321, 229 N. W. 138. It is clear from the statute and the above decisions that this court is without power to review the order of January 28, 1949.

However, the order of March 18, 1949, may be reviewable here. While the writ to review the same was not issued here until May 17, 1949, the time for such purpose had been extended by this court to include such date.

We have not determined that such an order is reviewable here. However, in Lickfett v. Jorgenson, 179 Minn. 321, 229 N. W. 138, we examined such an order upon the merits and upheld it. Based thereon, we are of the opinion that the present motion should be denied, without prejudice, and with leave to respondents to renew the same at the time of the oral argument herein. The second question above outlined may be then decided.

So ordered.
#### PHILIP F. SLACK v. JOSEPH REEDER.

If a plaintiff, who becomes entitled to a judgment by default in vacation, omits to enter the same until after the term next after such default, he cannot have such judgment until he has given thirty days’ notice to the defendant.

*G. S.*Cannon, for the defendant, moved to set aside the judgment in this case, as having been improvideutly entered. *A. Dutcher,*for plaintiff, *contra.*Before Elmer and Van Dyke, Justices.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Elmer, J.

The summons in this case was returnable in May, 1862, and a declaration filed within thirty days thereafter. No further proceedings were taken until the present term of the court, when a judgment was entered by default, and an assessment filed, followed by a final judgment and execution. This proceeding was claimed to be in pursuance of the second section of the act to facilitate the administration of justice, *Nix. Dig.*633, § 110.* We think this judgment was irregularly entered, and must be set aside, and we-find, on consultation with the other judges, that they concur in this opinion. There is nothing in the statute which *349interferes with the full operation of section 90 of the rules of this court. That section requires that, “if any party would take advantage of the failure of the adverse party in not filing his declaration, plea, or other pleading, within the time prescribed by law, he shall take such advantage at the term next after such failure.” The statute authorizes an entry of the judgment in term, or in vacation, so that if after the default, a judgment shall not have been entered before the term, it may be then entered by the attorney without the order of the court, or by a special order therefor, as before the statute. But if the plaintiff fails to do either, he comes within the operation of the rule, and cannot afterwards enter his judgment under the statute or by order of the court on motion, unless he has given thirty days’ notice to the adverse party, as prescribed by the rule.

Judgment set aside.

Cited in *Dock*v. *Elizabethtown Manufacturing Co.,*5 *Vroom*314.

*

*Rev., p.*877, *§*144.
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

The undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code, in his capacity as interim principal financial officer of SRI/Surgical Express, Inc.
(SRI), that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of SRI on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 SRI.



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                                           
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------
|                        |  |  | 
|Date: November 10, 2010 |  |  |  | By: |  | /S/    MARK R.
FARIS                      
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Mark R. Faris                             
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF CORPORATE CONTROLLER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of ATSI Communications, Inc. on Form 10-Q
for the period ending April 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Antonio Estrada Jr., Sr. VP of Finance &
Corporate Controller and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C, ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,





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





2)
            the
      information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and result of operations of the
    Company.





By /s/
Antonio Estrada Jr.


Antonio
Estrada Jr.


Sr. VP of
Finance & Corporate Controller and


Principal
Financial Officer


June 12,
2009
Submitted April 4,

reversed May 28, 2008

#### In the Matter of T. F., Alleged to be a Mentally Ill Person. STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*T. F., *Appellant.*

Umatilla County Circuit Court

MC050037; A129723

185 P3d 554

Victoria K. Moffet filed the brief for appellant.

Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Samuel A. Kubernick, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Sercombe, Judge.

PER CURIAM

*298PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing her as a mentally ill person for a period not to exceed 180 days. ORS 426.130. Appellant argues that the trial court did not make adequate findings to support its judgment and that the record does not establish by clear and convincing evidence that she is unable to provide for her basic needs because of a mental disorder. *See*ORS 426.005(l)(d). The state concedes that the evidence is insufficient for involuntary commitment and that the judgment should be reversed. On *de novo*review of the record, we accept the state’s concession and reverse.

Reversed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

______________________________

MOHAMMED AL-ADAHI, et al., :

:

Petitioners, :

:

v. : Civil Action No. 05-280 (GK) 

 :

GEORGE W. BUSH, et al., :

:

Respondents. :

______________________________:

ORDER

A Status Conference was held in this case on January 26, 2009.

Upon consideration of the representations of the parties, and the

entire record herein, it is hereby

ORDERED, that parties’ motions on the admission of hearsay

evidence are due no later than 10 days prior to the date on which

initial briefs for judgment are due, pursuant to § II.C of this

Court’s Case Management Order #1.

 /s/ 

January 27, 2009 Gladys Kessler

United States District Judge

Copies to: Attorneys of Record via ECF
EXHIBIT 32.1








CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Michael Karfunkel, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of National General Holdings Corp. (the “Company”), hereby certify, that, to my knowledge:


|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                             
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 (the “Report”) of the Company 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.

Date: March 28, 2014By:/s/ Michael KarfunkelMichael KarfunkelChairman, President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm








We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-198504) on Form S-3 and the registration statement (No. 333-190611) on Form S-8 of BMC Stock Holdings, Inc. of our report dated March 15, 2016 with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of BMC Stock Holdings, Inc. (formerly known as Building Materials Holding Corporation) as of December 31, 2014, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows, for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2014, which reports appear in the December 31, 2015 annual report on Form 10-K of BMC Stock Holdings, Inc.











/s/ KPMG LLP


Boise, ID


March 15, 2016
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATIONS
      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 on Form 10-QSB of Organic To Go Food
      Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the period ended
      September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
      the
      date hereof (the “Report”), Jason Brown, as Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
      and Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:





(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 resultsof
                operations of the Company.




/s/ Jason BrownJason
                Brown
              Chairman,
                Chief Executive Officer and
              Chief
                Financial Officer
              
              Dated:
                November 13, 2007





The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
      and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange
      Act
      of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing
      of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of
      any
      general incorporation language in such filing.