alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STEPHEN V. MANGRUM,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-4577

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 1, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Taylor County.

Gregory S. Parker, Judge.

Stephen V. Mangrum, pro se, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Barbara Debelius, Assistant Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WETHERELL, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
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

DAY HIGH

 527

 598

 539

 522

 519

 516

 524

 540

 591

 604

 639

 690

 716

 689

 763

 777

 782

 814

 837

 832

 819

 826

 815

 854

 823

 828

 813

 840

 852

 846

 455

 486

 484

 437

 446

 445

 442

 443

 438

 433

 427

 416

 407

 396

 391

 393

 397

 398

 401

 400

 405

 394

 409

 431

 426

 434

 454

 483

 490

 474

 495

 522

 504

 497

 490

 487

 490

 489

 492

 494

 494

 528

 519

 512

 528

 525

 537

 542

 563

 554

 544

 540

 551

 560

 563

 569

 582

 593

 605

 596

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

NOVEMBER 2003 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: December 11, 2003

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 13 (O'NEILL)
§ 10.525 What information must the employee report? ( a ) An employee who is receiving compensation for partial or total disability must advise OWCP immediately of any return to work, either part-time or full-time. An employee must report all outside employment, including any concurrent dissimilar employment held at the time of injury, even if the injury did not result in any lost time in that position. In addition, an employee who is receiving compensation for partial or total disability will periodically be required to submit a report of earnings from employment or self-employment, either part-time or full-time. (See § 10.5(g) for a definition of “earnings.”)
( b ) The employee must report even those earnings which do not seem likely to affect his or her level of benefits. Many kinds of income, though not all, will result in reduction of compensation benefits. While earning income will not necessarily result in a reduction of compensation, failure to report income may result in forfeiture of all benefits paid during the reporting period.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with Amendment No. 3 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Report) of Community Bankers Trust Corporation (the
Company), the undersigned Executive Vice President, who is acting as the Companys principal executive officer, and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to their 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 consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company and its
subsidiaries as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Rex L. Smith, IIIRex L. Smith, III Executive
Vice President (principal executive officer)/s/ Bruce E. ThomasBruce E. Thomas Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer


Date: January 13, 2011
**Exhibit 12.2****CERTIFICATION**I,Efstathios D. Gourdomichalis, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of FreeSeas Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respectto the period covered by this annual report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this annual report;  4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as at the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’sinternal control over financial reporting; and 5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the company’s internal controlover financial reporting.June 29, 2006                                                                  /s/ Efstathios D. Gourdomichalis   Efstathios D. Gourdomichalis,        Principal Financial Officer
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

DAY HIGH

 97

 108

 120

 108

 112

 117

 95

 101

 129

 138

 122

 73

 75

 87

 94

 72

 67

 67

 73

 66

 64

 63

 66

 69

 68

 65

 65

 64

 68

 67

 79

 91

 90

 18

 91

 89

 90

 93

 92

 100

 76

 69

 71

 70

 73

 66

 65

 63

 63

 63

 63

 62

 63

 67

 65

 64

 64

 64

 64

 64

 88

 95

 98

 84

 97

 96

 93

 95

 100

 106

 90

 71

 72

 76

 81

 68

 66

 64

 65

 64

 63

 63

 65

 68

 66

 65

 64

 64

 67

 65

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

APRIL 2013 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: June 25, 2013

HIGH LOW MEAN

 65.9

 66.1

 66.8

 66.2

 65.5

 65.5

 66.5

 64.8

 64.4

 66.2

 66.0

 64.5

 63.9

 63.4

 62.1

 59.2

 59.0

 57.8

 58.7

 59.3

 59.3

 59.7

 59.8

 59.7

 59.5

 59.1

 59.1

 59.1

 59.5

 59.2

 62.8

 62.6

 62.4

 63.6

 62.2

 62.3

 62.4

 60.9

 59.4

 60.5

 63.0

 60.8

 60.5

 59.7

 59.3

 56.3

 55.4

 55.2

 55.7

 56.8

 56.7

 57.4

 56.7

 58.1

 57.9

 57.6

 57.7

 57.2

 57.7

 57.7

 64.5

 64.5

 64.6

 64.9

 63.8

 63.6

 64.3

 63.0

 61.9

 63.3

 64.3

 62.3

 62.3

 61.4

 60.6

 57.9

 57.3

 56.7

 57.1

 58.0

 58.1

 58.5

 58.2

 58.7

 58.5

 58.3

 58.2

 58.0

 58.5

 58.4

HIGH LOW MEAN

 8.4

 8.7

 8.7

 8.6

 8.8

 8.9

 8.9

 8.9

 9.2

 9.1

 9.0

 9.2

 9.3

 9.3

 9.4

 9.8

 10.0

 10.0

 10.1

 10.0

 9.9

 9.8

 9.8

 9.3

 9.4

 9.5

 9.5

 9.6

 9.5

 9.5

 7.8

 8.1

 7.9

 7.6

 8.2

 8.3

 8.4

 8.3

 8.5

 8.5

 8.3

 8.8

 8.8

 8.9

 9.0

 9.3

 9.7

 9.8

 9.8

 9.7

 9.7

 9.6

 9.1

 9.1

 9.2

 9.3

 9.3

 9.3

 9.2

 9.3

 8.1

 8.3

 8.4

 8.2

 8.4

 8.6

 8.6

 8.6

 8.8

 8.7

 8.6

 8.9

 9.0

 9.1

 9.2

 9.6

 9.9

 10.0

 10.0

 9.9

 9.8

 9.7

 9.4

 9.2

 9.3

 9.4

 9.4

 9.5

 9.4

 9.4

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIPON ON THE STANISLAUS RIVER

 ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS WATER TEMPERATURE, DEG DISSOLVED OXYZEN, PPM
### SUBCHAPTER IV—EXECUTIVE REPORTING
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 
 FORM 6-K
 REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR
15d-16 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the month of July, 2011
COMMISSION FILE NUMBER 001-33373
 
 CAPITAL PRODUCT PARTNERS L.P.
 (Translation of registrants name into English)
 
 3 IASSONOS STREET
PIRAEUS, 18537 GREECE
(address of principal executive offices)
 
  þ o
  o þ
  o þ
  o þ




---



##### 



Item 1  Information Contained in this Form 6-K Report
  Page 2 of 3




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  CAPITAL PRODUCT PARTNERS, L.P.,By:
    Capital GP L.L.C., its general partner/s/                        Ioannis E. LazaridisName:
    Ioannis E. LazaridisTitle:
    Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer of Capital GP
L.L.C.  Page 3 of 3
### Part D—Special Assistance and Other Programs
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 22112]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9573]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Human Genome Research Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Human Genome Research Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel, Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)--Model Organism 
database (MOD).
    Date: June 20, 2011.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Crystal Gateway Marriott, 1700 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Arlington, VA 22202.
    Contact Person: Keith McKenney, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
NHGRI, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 4076, Bethesda, MD 20814, 301-594-
4280, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#afc2ccc4cac1c1cad6c4efc2cec6c381c1c6c781c8c0d9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d1bcb2bab4bfbfb4a8ba91bcb0b8bdffbfb8b9ffb6bea7">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.172, Human 
Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: April 14, 2011.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-9573 Filed 4-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<PAGE>   1

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.139


                     [MEGO MORTGAGE CORPORATION LETTERHEAD]




                                   [PEC LOGO]

                         PREFERRED EQUITIES CORPORATION

         4310 Paradise Road, Las Vegas, NV 89109-6597 o 702.737.3700 o
                  Toll Free 1.800.634.6431 o Fax 702.369.4398


April 22, 1998


Mr. Jeff S. Moore, President
Mego Mortgage Corporation
1000 Parkwood Circle - 5th Floor
Atlanta, GA  30339


Dear Mr. Moore:

Reference is made to the Services and Consulting Agreement, between Mego
Mortgage Corporation ("Mego Mortgage") and Preferred Equities Corporation
("PEC") dated as of September 1, 1996 (the "Agreement"). This is to advise that
Mego Financial Corp., the corporate parent of PEC, has entered into an
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of March 25, 1998, with Sycamore Partners,
LLC. The merger is expected to be effective within the next two months and the
merger agreement requires Mego Financial Corp. to cause PEC to terminate the
Agreement on or prior to the merger date.

this letter shall constitute notice of termination of the Agreement. Such
termination shall be effective on the date of the completion of the merger or
in 90 days from the date hereof, whichever is sooner.

At the time of the termination all amounts due from Mego Mortgage to PEC for
services performed under the terms of the Agreement shall be paid in full.

Please indicate your agreement with the foregoing by executing a copy of this
letter in the space provided below and returning it to the undersigned at your
earliest convenience.


Sincerely,

PREFERRED EQUITIES CORPORATION

/s/ FREDERICK H. CONTE

Frederick H. Conte
Executive Vice President


Accepted and Approved:

MEGO MORTGAGE CORPORATION

By: /s/ JEFF S. MOORE
    -------------------------
    Jeff S. Moore, President


Date:    4-28-98
      -------------
§ 226.73 Changes in reduction amount. The reduction amount is not changed when a tier I benefit increases because of a recomputation or a general adjustment in annuity rates, such as a cost-of-living increase. However, the reduction amount may change for the following reasons: ( a ) *A spouse or divorced spouse becomes entitled to a tier I benefit after the effective date of the reduction.* The reduction amount is recomputed as if the spouse or divorced spouse were entitled to a tier I benefit on the date the reduction first applied. The new reduction amount applies beginning with the date the spouse or divorced spouse tier I benefit begins. Example: An employee became entitled to an annuity with a tier I component of $500 on May 1, 1991. He was also receiving a state disability benefit of $300 a month based on employment not covered under the Social Security Act. On June 1, 1991, the employee's tier I increased to $520.70. On October 1, 1991, the employee's wife becomes entitled to an annuity with a tier I benefit of $260.00. The tier I amount ($250) that would have been payable to the wife on May 1, 1991 (assuming she had been eligible for a benefit at that time) is used to determine the reduction for other disability benefits beginning October 1, 1991.
( b ) *The tier I benefit of a spouse or divorced spouse annuity ends after the effective date of the reduction.* The new reduction amount is computed using the tier I rate to which the employee was entitled when the reduction first applied. The new reduction amount applies beginning with the month after the month in which the spouse or divorced spouse tier I benefit ends.
( c ) The average current earnings are redetermined, as shown in § 226.74.
( d ) *The amount of the other disability benefit changes.* The reduction amount is recomputed to use the new benefit rate beginning with the date on which the new rate is payable. Any increases in the tier I amounts which were effective after the reduction first applied are not included in computing the new reduction amount.
Example: The employee's tier I benefit is $500 on May 1, 1991, when the annuity is first reduced for other disability benefits. The tier I increases to $520 effective June 1, 1991. When the amount of the disability benefit changes on October 1, 1991, $500, not $520, is used as the employee tier I amount in recomputing the reduction amount.
MILLER BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC.            EXHIBIT 21
                                 
                  SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

                          JUNE 27, 1998


The subsidiaries of the Registrant are as follows:

                                                            Percentage of Voting
                                              Incorporated   Securities Owned by
            Name                              Under Law of:   Immediate Parent

Miller Building Systems of Indiana, Inc.         Indiana             100%

Miller Building Systems of Pennsylvania,Inc.     Indiana             100%

Miller Building Systems of Kansas, Inc.           Kansas             100%

Miller Building Systems of South Dakota,Inc.  South Dakota           100% (1)

Miller Construction Services, Inc.               Indiana             100%

United Structures, Inc.                          New York            100%

PME Pacific Systems, Inc.                      California            100% (2)


(1)  Wholly-owned subsidiary of Miller Building Systems of Kansas, Inc.

(2)  Inactive Corporation with no assets.
#### Mohamed Bachir BARRY, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-1032.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 28, 2006.

Decided: July 20, 2006.

Sopo Ngwa, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Larry D. Adams, Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Respondent.

Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Mohamed Bachir Barry, a native and citizen of Guinea, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming the immigration judge’s denial of Barry’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.* We deny the petition for review.

Barry challenges the immigration judge’s finding that his testimony was not credible, and that he otherwise failed to meet his burden of proof to qualify for asylum. We will reverse this decision only if the evidence “was so compelling that no reasonable fact finder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” *Rusu v. INS,*296 F.3d 316, 325 n. 14 (4th Cir.2002) (internal quotations and citations omitted). We uphold credibility determinations of the immigration judge if they are supported by substantial evidence. *Tewabe v. Gonzales,*446 F.3d 533, 538 (4th Cir.2006).

We have reviewed the administrative record and the decisions of the Board and the immigration judge, and find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s negative credibility finding, as well as its conclusion that Barry failed to establish the past persecution or well-founded fear of future persecution necessary to establish eligibility for asylum. *See 8*C.F.R. § 1208.13(a) (2006) (stating that the burden of proof is on the alien to establish eligibility for asylum); *INS v. Elias-Zaca*
      *227
      *rias,*502 U.S. 478, 488, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (same). Moreover, as Barry cannot sustain his burden on the asylum claim, he cannot establish his entitlement to withholding of removal. *See Camara v. Ashcroft,*378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir.2004) (“Because the burden of proof for withholding of removal is higher than for asylum — even though the facts that must be proved are the same — an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3)”).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.

*PETITION DENIED.*

Barry did not challenge the immigration judge’s denial of protection under the Convention Against Torture before the Board, and does not seek to raise the issue in this court.
#### Helen E. Bing et al., Suing as Stockholders of Consolidated Oil Corporation, on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Stockholders of Said Corporation Similarly Situated, et al., Respondents, and Morris R. Spelfogel et al., Interveners, Respondents, v. Consolidated Oil Corporation et al., Defendants, and R. Costello et al., Defendants-Respondents. Charles F. Benbrook, as a Stockholder of Said Corporation, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002

I, Robert J. Skandalaris, certify that:

1. I have
reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Oakmont Acquisition Corporation;

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-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) 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 our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us 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 our 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:

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 registrant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: March 13, 2007



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|                                                 
|/s/ Robert J. Skandalaris                        
|Robert J. Skandalaris                            
|Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Officer