alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32
                    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 Reflect Scientific, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly
Report"), we, Kim Boyce, President and director, and Kevin Cooksy,
Secretary/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:

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

Dated: 8/17/06                           /s/Kim Boyce
       -------                           ---------------------------
                                         Kim Boyce
                                         President and Director

Dated: 8/17/06                           /s/Kevin Cooksy
      --------                           ---------------------------
                                         Kevin Cooksy
                                         Secretary/Treasurer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-7081
DEMBRY V. WHITE, a/k/a Dembry V. Shabazz, Petitioner - Appellant,
versusRONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-42-2) Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 30, 1999 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Dembry V. White, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Dembry White appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). White’s case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised White that the failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, White failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce , 727 F.2d 91, 93-94 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 467 U.S. 1208 (1984); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). White has waived appellate review by failing to file objections afterreceiving proper notice. We accordingly deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 20639 Summary Calendar

WILFREDO PINEDA, also known as Wilfredo Pineda Alarcon,

Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; MARK SIEGL, Field Office Direc tor, United States Citizenship & Immigration Services,

Defendants

- Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:15

- CV

- 2179

Before REAVLEY, GRAVES, and HO, Circuit Judges

.
PER CURIAM: *

The judgment of the district court is affirmed for the reasons given by

that court in its opinion of S eptember 11, 2017.

AFFIRMED.

* 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

July 2, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk Case: 17-20639 Document: 00514536808 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/02/2018
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JOSHUA ANTONE BANGAWAN

FERNANDEZ, a.k.a. j_man89,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 13-50231

D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00721-R

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 18, 2014** 

Before: ALARCÓN, O’SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

Joshua Antone Bangawan Fernandez appeals from the district court’s

judgment and challenges the 20-year term of supervised release and mandatory

drug-testing condition imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution 

FILED

FEB 27 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)(A) and (b)(1). We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Fernandez contends that the district court erred by failing to consider and

address his mitigating arguments and, as a result, imposed a substantively

unreasonable term of supervised release. The record shows that the district court

did not procedurally err and the 20-year term is substantively reasonable in light of

the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. 

See United States v. Apodaca, 641 F.3d 1077, 1082-84 (9th Cir. 2011).

Fernandez next contends that the district court erred in imposing the

mandatory condition of drug testing as part of his supervised release. Because

Fernandez did not object to this condition in the district court, we review for plain

error, see United States v. Garcia, 522 F.3d 855, 860 (9th Cir. 2008), and find

none. Drug testing is a mandatory condition of supervised release. See 18 U.S.C.

§ 3583(d). Although Fernandez does not have a history of drug use and drugs did

not play a role in the offense, the district court properly imposed this condition

because there is no evidence he has a low risk of future substance abuse. See

United States v. Jackson, 189 F.3d 820, 825 (9th Cir. 1999).

AFFIRMED.

2 13-50231
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

LUCKENSON DESRIVIERES,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 817 MAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of February, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 715

 696

 688

 661

 636

 711

 682

 637

 618

 706

 624

 639

 690

 692

 693

 658

 719

 651

 641

 593

 641

 663

 558

 497

 529

 485

 520

 574

 621

 583

 610

 405

 406

 404

 443

 425

 439

 420

 418

 416

 390

 425

 421

 435

 434

 445

 440

 438

 435

 420

 418

 405

 406

 426

 432

 419

 425

 443

 455

 443

 436

 444

 481

 482

 490

 495

 503

 506

 493

 492

 484

 500

 515

 501

 516

 514

 511

 515

 529

 502

 484

 473

 487

 478

 465

 461

 462

 460

 475

 493

 485

 478

 486

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2007 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE:November 13, 2007

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 313

 314

 319

 322

 327

 329

 321

 320

 315

 325

 334

 326

 335

 334

 332

 334

 343

 326

 315

 308

 317

 311

 303

 301

 302

 300

 310

 321

 316

 311

 316

TOTAL 15,216

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT HEADWORKS
### §709a. Authorization of appropriations

There is hereby authorized to be appropriated, from time to time, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such amounts as may be necessary to carry out the provisions and to accomplish the purposes of said conventions and of this subchapter and regulations made pursuant thereto, and the Secretary of the Interior is authorized out of such moneys to employ in the city of Washington and elsewhere such persons and means as he may deem necessary for such purpose and may cooperate with local authorities in the protection of migratory birds and make the necessary investigations connected therewith.

(July 3, 1918, ch. 128, §9, as added June 20, 1936, ch. 634, §5, 49 Stat. 1556; amended 1939 Reorg. Plan No. II, §4(f), eff. July 1, 1939, 4 F.R. 2731, 53 Stat. 1433.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Act June 20, 1936, ch. 634, §5, 49 Stat. 1556, provided in part that this section is effective as of the day aforesaid (June 30, 1937). See Effective Date of 1936 Amendment note set out under section 703 of this title.

#### Availability of Funds

Act June 20, 1936, ch. 634, §6, 49 Stat. 1557, provided: "That all moneys now or hereafter available for administration and enforcement of said Act approved July 3, 1918 [this subchapter], shall be equally available for the administration and enforcement of said Act as hereby amended."

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of certain enforcement functions of Secretary or other official in Department of the Interior under this subchapter to Federal Inspector, Office of Federal Inspector for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation System, and subsequent transfer to Secretary of Energy, then to Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects, see Transfer of Functions note set out under section 706 of this title.

Transfer of functions of Secretary of Agriculture to Secretary of the Interior by Reorg. Plan No. II of 1939, see Transfer of Functions note set out under section 701 of this title.
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 7 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 8 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 9 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 10 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 11 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 12 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 13 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 14 of 15
Case 19-71020-FJS Doc 20 Filed 04/17/19 Entered 04/17/19 16:06:49 Desc Main

 Document Page 15 of 15
### §692. Game sanctuaries or refuges in Ocala National Forest; creation

The President of the United States is authorized to designate as game refuges such lands of the United States within the Ocala National Forest, in the State of Florida, as in his judgment should be set aside for the protection of game animals and birds, but it is not intended that the lands so designated shall cease to be parts of the national forest within which they are located, and the establishment of such game sanctuaries or refuges shall not prevent the Secretary of Agriculture from permitting other uses of the lands under and in conformity with the laws and regulations applicable thereto so far as such uses may be consistent with the purposes for which such game sanctuaries or refuges are established.

(June 28, 1930, ch. 709, §1, 46 Stat. 827.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Presidential Designation

Lands comprising the Ocala National Game Refuge were designated by Proclamation of July 24, 1930 (46 Stat. 3031), and Executive Order No. 5814 of Mar. 1, 1932.
Jones (Tracy) Clift Banks (Delta) Fed Dos Byron Delta Mendota Canal-California Aqueduct Intertie

Pumping Plant Court Pumping Plant Banks Amigos Bethany Pumping (DMC to CA) Release (CA to DMC) DMC-Pool

Day Fed

1

State

2

Total

3

Total

4

State

5

Fed

6

Total

7

XVC

8

XVC

9

Total

10

Fed

11

State

12

XVC

13

Total

14

Fed

15

State

16

XVC

17

Total

18

Demands

19

1 3,647 0 3,647 1,180 830 0 830 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,083

2 3,642 0 3,642 1,171 809 0 809 0 0 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,815

3 1,811 0 1,811 1,182 1,234 0 1,234 0 0 163 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,465

4 1,813 0 1,813 1,170 1,235 0 1,235 0 0 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,334

5 1,813 0 1,813 1,151 818 0 818 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,809

6 1,812 0 1,812 1,161 1,033 0 1,033 0 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,105

7 1,815 0 1,815 1,157 1,249 0 1,249 0 14 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,451

8 1,817 0 1,817 1,174 1,249 0 1,249 0 14 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,830

9 1,817 0 1,817 1,180 809 0 809 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,605

10 1,820 0 1,820 1,176 1,277 0 1,277 0 0 178 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,543

11 1,824 0 1,824 1,173 1,235 0 1,235 0 0 153 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,290

12 1,825 0 1,825 1,184 809 0 809 0 0 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,368

13 1,822 0 1,822 1,182 1,262 0 1,262 0 0 113 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,976

Totals 27,278 0 27,278 15,241 13,849 0 13,849 0 28 1,671 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41,674

Comments: All values in Acre - Feet

Historical Archive and Report Database

Federal-State Operations

May 2024 Run Date: 5/14/2024
(No. 74-CC-549

#### Park Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of General Services, Respondent.

*Opinion filed April 17, 1974.*

Park Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5114 

To amend title 31, United States Code, to limit the amount that the portion 

of a taxpayer’s tax refund attributable to the child tax credit and the 

earned income tax credit may be reduced by reason of student loan 

debt. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 15, 2019 

Ms. GARCIA of Texas (for herself, Ms. NORTON, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. 

ESCOBAR, Ms. JAYAPAL, Ms. TLAIB, Ms. HAALAND, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Mr. EVANS, Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ, Mr. COX of California, Mr. SOTO, 

and Mr. GRIJALVA) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Oversight and Reform, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined 

by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 

within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title 31, United States Code, to limit the amount 

that the portion of a taxpayer’s tax refund attributable 

to the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit 

may be reduced by reason of student loan debt. 

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 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 

5 ‘‘Stop EITC and CTC Seizures Act’’. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5114 IH

1 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON REDUCTION OF CERTAIN POR2 TIONS OF TAX REFUND BY AMOUNT OF STU3 DENT LOAN DEBT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3720A of title 31, United 

5 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing new subsection: 

7 ‘‘(j) The Secretary of the Treasury may not reduce 

8 under subsection (c), by reason of student loan debt, a 

9 refund of Federal taxes paid that is payable to a taxpayer 

10 to the extent such reduction would cause such refund to 

11 be less than the sum of credits allowed under subpart C 

12 of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal 

13 Revenue Code of 1986 by reason of sections 24 and 32 

14 of such Code. For purposes of the previous sentence, the 

15 Secretary of the Treasury shall determine the amount of 

16 the reduction under subsection (c) that is by reason of 

17 student loan debt and the amount of the refund that is 

18 being reduced after applying all other reductions under 

19 such subsection.’’. 

20 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

21 this section shall apply to refunds of Federal taxes paid 

22 for taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment 

23 of this Act. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Kevin Cooksy, certify that:  1.   I have reviewed this Quarterly Report (the Report) on Form 10-QSB of the small business issuer;  2.   Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this Report;  3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this Report;  4.   The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:  a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this Report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this Report based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this Report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and  5.   The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions);  a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.  Date:August 17, 2007By:/s/Kevin CooksyKevin Cooksy, Secretary Treasurer
#### In the Matter of Harry M. Chapin, Respondent, against Board of Education of the City of Buffalo, Appellant.

Present—Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.
Second Amendment to Citrix Systems, Inc. 2005 Equity Incentive Plan



 SECOND AMENDMENT TO 
 CITRIX SYSTEMS, INC. 
 2005 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN 
 WHEREAS, Citrix Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) desires to amend the Citrix Systems, Inc. 2005 Equity Incentive Plan (as amended and in effect,
the “Plan”) to (i) increase the aggregate number of shares authorized for issuance under the Plan by 5.4 million shares of common stock, par value $.001 per share, of the Company (the “Common Stock”) and
(ii) increase the aggregate number of shares of Common Stock issuable pursuant to restricted stock, restricted stock units, performance units or stock grants by 1,000,000 shares of Common Stock (the “Plan Amendment”); and 

WHEREAS, on February 7, 2007, subject to stockholder approval, the Board of Directors of the Company approved the Plan Amendment. 
 NOW THEREFORE, in accordance with Section 15 of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 
  

	1.	Section 4 of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the first paragraph thereof in its entirety and substituting the following in lieu thereof: 

 “At no time shall the number of shares of Stock issued pursuant to or subject to outstanding Awards granted under the Plan (including
pursuant to Incentive Options), nor the number of shares of Stock issued pursuant to Incentive Options, exceed 20,900,000 shares of Stock; subject, however, to the provisions of Section 8 of the Plan. In addition to the foregoing, at no time
shall the number of shares of Stock issued pursuant to Restricted Stock, Restricted Stock Units, Performance Units or Stock Grants exceed 2,000,000 shares of Stock; subject, however, to the provisions of Section 8 of the Plan.” 

 

	2.	The Plan Amendment shall be effective upon approval of the stockholders of the Company at the 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. If the Plan Amendment is not so approved at such
meeting, then the amendment to the Plan set forth herein shall be void ab initio. 

  

	3.	Except herein above provided, the Plan is hereby ratified, confirmed and approved in all respects.