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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special Projects Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, November 14, 2017.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Matthew O'Sullivan at 1-888-912-1227 or (510) 907-5274.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special Projects Committee will be held Tuesday, November 14, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time via teleconference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Matthew O'Sullivan. For more information please contact Matthew O'Sullivan at 1-888-912-1227 or (510) 907-5274, or write TAP Office, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612-5217 or contact us at the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*                     The agenda will include various IRS issues.                

The agenda will include a discussion on various special topics with IRS processes.

Dated: October 1, 2017.

Susan Jimerson,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2017-21483 Filed 10-4-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### Rebecca Seidner, Respondent, v Denise V. Unger et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

[667 NYS2d 384]

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries arising from an automobile accident, the defendants Denise V. Unger and Raymond G. Unger appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Hickman, J.), dated September 10, 1996, which, upon the plaintiff’s motion to set aside as inadequate a jury verdict in her favor in the principal sum of $40,000, granted the motion and ordered a new trial on the issue of damages only unless the appellants stipulated to the entry of a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $95,000.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the facts and as an exercise of discretion, with costs, the motion is denied, the verdict is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Putnam County, for entry of a judgment in accordance with the jury verdict.

This action arises from an automobile accident in which the plaintiff, a passenger in the defendant’s car, received several facial lacerations from flying glass. Though the lacerations were sutured by a plastic surgeon, the plaintiff, 18 years old at the time of the accident, was left with a two-inch scar on her right cheek.

The trial court set aside the $40,000 verdict, stating that it *363was inadequate based on the appearance of the scar and the plaintiffs 59-year life expectancy as of the time of trial. However, the defendant produced evidence that the appearance of the scar could be improved by several plastic surgery procedures which the plaintiff has so far declined.

It is well settled that the amount of damages to be awarded for personal injuries is primarily a question of fact for the jury *(see, Bolduc v Sheth,*208 AD2d 789; *Rodriguez v City of New York,*191 AD2d 420; *Senko v Fonda,*53 AD2d 638). On the record before us, the $40,000 awarded by the jury does not “deviate * * * materially from what would be reasonable compensation” (CPLR 5501 [c]; *see, Chase v City of New York,*233 AD2d 474; *Abdulai v Roy,*232 AD2d 229; *LeBron v Brentwood Union Free School Dist.,*212 AD2d 512; *Artis v City of New York,*183 AD2d 685). Therefore, the trial court improperly exercised its discretion in setting aside the verdict as inadequate. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Florio, JJ., concur.
#### James W. Mooney et al., Appellants, v Charles H. Buck, Sr., Respondent.

[667 NYS2d 125]

Mercure, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Ceresia, Jr., J.), entered April 23, 1997 in Rensselaer County, which, *inter alia,*granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

In May 1994, plaintiffs contracted to purchase defendant’s real property in the Town of Pittstown, Rensselaer County, for $25,000. By its terms, the contract was contingent upon successful testing of the existing well and septic system on the property ^ Plaintiffs did not have any tests conducted, however, and the parties closed on the transaction on September 29, 1994. Plaintiffs subsequently discovered that the well and septic system were not in good working condition. Plaintiffs then commenced this action to recover damages resulting from *1000defendant’s allegedly negligent, intentional and/or fraudulent misrepresentation concerning the condition of the well and septic system. Following joinder of issue and discovery, plaintiffs moved and defendant cross-moved for summary judgment. Supreme Court denied the motion, granted the cross motion and dismissed the complaint. Plaintiffs appeal.

We affirm. Regardless of any representations that defendant may have made concerning the condition of the well and septic system, we conclude that plaintiffs’ conclusory and unsubstantiated claims that they were prevented from testing the well and septic system were insufficient to defeat defendant’s summary judgment motion *(see, Cohen v Colistra,*233 AD2d 542, 543). Rather, having closed on the transaction without insisting upon the performance of tests necessary to determine the condition of the well and septic system, plaintiffs “unreasonably failed to investigate the truth of the alleged misrepresentation” forming the basis for the action *(Nestler v Whiteside,*162 AD2d 845, 848; *see, Cohen v Colistra, supra; Callahan v Miller,*194 AD2d 904, 906), thereby defeating their causes of action.

Cardona, P. J., Casey, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Edward Gonzalez, Appellant.

[666 NYS2d 509]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.), rendered August 20, 1996, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2955 

To amend the Whaling Convention Act of 1949 to require that the United 

States Commissioner to the International Whaling Commission must 

be a Federal employee. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 18, 2009 

Mr. RAHALL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Whaling Convention Act of 1949 to require 

that the United States Commissioner to the International 

Whaling Commission must be a Federal employee. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REQUIREMENTS FOR APPOINTMENT OF 

4 UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER TO THE 

5 INTERNATIONAL WHALING COMMISSION. 

6 (a) REQUIREMENT.—Section 3(a) of the Whaling 

7 Convention Act of 1949 (16 U.S.C. 916a(a)) is amended 

8 to read as follows: 


tjames on PRODPC75 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2955 IH

1 ‘‘(a) The United States Commissioner shall be ap2 pointed by the President, on the concurrent recommenda3 tions of the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Com4 merce, shall be an employee of the Federal Government, 

5 and shall serve at the pleasure of the President.’’. 

6 (b) APPLICATION.—The amendment made by sub7 section (a) shall apply with respect to any individual who 

8 is appointed, or reappointed, as United States Commis9 sioner to the International Whaling Commission on or 

10 after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on PRODPC75 with BILLS
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

MAXIANA SAINTFLEUR
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 0020

[ December 6, 2018 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Glenn D. Kelley , Judge; L.T. Case No.

502017CF002395AMB

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Patrick B. Burke, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Luke R. Napodano, Assistant At torney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

W ARNER
, D AMOORGIAN and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### In the Matter of Peter Secore, Petitioner, v Glenn S. Goord, as Commissioner of New York State Department of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[666 NYS2d 530]

—Determination unanimously annulled on the law without costs and petition granted. Memorandum: This CPLR article 78 proceeding was transferred to this Court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (g) to review the determination of respondent, made following a Tier II disciplinary hearing, finding petitioner guilty of violating inmate rule 114.10 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [15] [i] [smuggling]). The misbehavior report had also charged petitioner with violating inmate rule 113.23 (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [xiv] [posses*1132sion of contraband]) based upon a correction officer having found three cigarettes in petitioner’s sock while petitioner was on his way to the prison law library. That charge was dismissed by the Hearing Officer. Petitioner contends that, if the cigarettes that he possessed were not contraband items, then he could not be found guilty of smuggling those cigarettes. We agree. Therefore, respondent’s determination that petitioner was guilty of smuggling is not supported by substantial evidence *(see generally, People ex rel. Vega v Smith,*66 NY2d 130, 139). That determination is annulled and all reference to the incident should be expunged from petitioner’s institutional file *(see, Matter of Parker v Kelly,*140 AD2d 993). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.) Present—Green, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.
EXHIBIT 99.2

              Certification of Chief Financial Officer 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 Mattson Technology, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Ludger
Viefhues, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) 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.

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



March 31, 2003                         /S/ LUDGER VIEFHUES
                                      ------------------------------------
                                                 Ludger Viefhues
                                             Chief Financial Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk June 25, 2012

t0618 

# Order

June 25, 2012

144699

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 144699

COA: 301481

Wayne CC: 10

- 001337

- FC

GARLAND ROY ROYALL,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 26, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### Christopher LEE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Tyler PRICE and Douglas Yorke, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-2859.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

April 27, 2011.

Christopher Lee, Wheeling, IL, pro se.

Deborah L. Ahlstrand, Office of the Attorney General, Chicago, IL, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge, DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge and JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT CHRISTOPHER LEE’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION, filed on April 20, 2011, by the pro se appellant,

IT IS ORDERED that the final order issued on April 14, 2011 is WITHDRAWN and the judgment is VACATED.
Exhibit
4.1


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


2 HANSON PLACE, 12TH FLOOR, BROOKLYN,
N.Y. 11217


 


 


 


December 11, 2014


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


Smart Trust, Enhanced Value II Trust, Series
11


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York
Mellon is acting as trustee for Smart Trust, Enhanced Value II Trust, Series 11 set forth above (the “Trust”).
We enclosed a list of the Securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date hereof. The prices indicated therein reflect our
evaluation of such Securities as of close of business on December 10, 2014, in accordance with the valuation method set forth in
the Trust Indenture and Agreement. We consent to the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations
of the Trust Securities in the Registration Statement (No. 333-199645) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect
to the registration of the sale of the Trust Units and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


 


Very truly yours,


 


	 	/s/ GERARDO CIPRIANO 




Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President
<PAGE>
 
EXHIBIT 11.1

                WILSONS THE LEATHER EXPERTS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                            NET LOSS PER COMMON SHARE
                    (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)


                                                         QUARTER      QUARTER
                                                          ENDED        ENDED
                                                       MAY 2, 1998  MAY 3, 1997
                                                       -----------  -----------

Net loss                                                $  (4,537)   $(7,263)
                                                        =========    =======

Weighted average common shares outstanding                  9,532      7,650


Effect of options granted (1)                                --         --
Effect of warrant (1)                                        --         --
                                                        ---------    -------

Weighted average common shares outstanding - assuming
 dilution                                                   9,532      7,650
                                                        =========    =======

Basic net loss per common share                         $   (0.48)   $ (0.95)
                                                        =========    =======

Diluted net loss per common share (1)                   $   (0.48)   $ (0.95)
                                                        =========    =======


Note 1:  Under Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 128 "Earnings per
         Share," common stock equivalents are excluded when computing diluted
         net income or loss per common share if the effect is antidilutive.
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 amended Quarterly Report of Nano Mask, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael Marx, Chief Financial Officer (Principal 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 to the best of my 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 results of operations of the Company.   Dated:  February 10, 2010   /s/Michael Marx Michael Marx Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
EXHIBIT 32

      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SEC. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                   SEC. 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Annual  Report of Equus Gaming Company L.P. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the
year  ended  December  31,  2002  (the  "Report"),  I,  Thomas  B. Wilson, Chief
Executive  Officer  and  Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  Sec.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to Sec. 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.



/s/  Thomas  B.  Wilson
-----------------------
Thomas  B.  Wilson,  Chief
Executive  Officer  and  Acting
Chief  Financial  Officer

October  14,  2004


<PAGE>
Exhibit 32.1 Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code  I, Edward Suydam, the Chief Executive Officer of Nano Mask, Inc. (Nano Mask), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (i) the accompanying Form 10-Q of Nano Mask for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Nano Mask.  /s/ Edward Suydam Edward Suydam Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) Nano Mask, Inc.  January 27, 2012
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0164 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DONALD WAYNE PULST,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including April 6, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 28 2022

02/28/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0164
Exhibit 32.1  Certification by the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Entheos Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on the Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Harmel Rayat, 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:  (i) the Report filed by the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (ii) The information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company on the dates and for the periods presented therein.  ENTHEOS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.Date:  November 12, 2007By:/s/ Harmel RayatHarmel Rayat
President and Chief Executive Officer  This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated December 2, 2014, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-199479) of Smart Trust,
Zacks Diversified Equity & Corporate Bond Trust, Series 7.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


Grant
Thornton LLP


Chicago, Illinois


December 2, 2014