alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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

 154

 152

 149

 153

 149

 150

 163

 151

 151

 153

 160

 160

 156

 159

 164

 158

 158

 159

 158

 159

 162

 162

 171

 166

 163

 159

 153

 123

 142

 141

 149

 144

 146

 142

 144

 130

 134

 142

 143

 140

 143

 152

 152

 151

 150

 149

 145

 151

 151

 152

 154

 157

 156

 162

 158

 156

 151

 110

 101

 126

 134

 141

 150

 149

 147

 149

 142

 145

 148

 148

 147

 149

 155

 156

 154

 155

 157

 151

 156

 156

 155

 157

 159

 159

 166

 162

 160

 157

 133

 110

 131

 138

 144

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MAY 2001 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: June 4, 2001

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

STATEN ISLAND ON THE SOUTH FORK MOKELUMNE RIVER
**Exhibit 24****POWER OF ATTORNEY**     Each director and officer of Huntington Preferred Capital, Inc. (the “Corporation”), whosesignature appears below hereby appoints Donald R. Kimble and Thomas P. Reed, or any of them, as hisor her attorney-in-fact, to sign, in his or her name and behalf and in any and all capacitiesstated below, and to cause to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, theCorporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K (the “Annual Report”) for the fiscal year ended December31, 2005, and likewise to sign and file any amendments, including post-effective amendments, to theAnnual Report, and the Corporation hereby also appoints such persons as its attorneys-in-fact andeach of them as its attorney-in-fact with like authority to sign and file the Annual Report and anyamendments thereto in its name and behalf, each such person and the Corporation hereby granting tosuch attorney-in-fact full power of substitution and revocation, and hereby ratifying all that suchattorney-in-fact or his substitute may do by virtue hereof.     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Power of Attorney, in counterparts ifnecessary, effective as of March 24, 2006.DIRECTORS/OFFICERS:     Signatures Title  /s/ Donald R. Kimble Donald R. Kimble President and Director
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 for May Drilling Partnership 1984-1 and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000739645
<NAME>                        May Drilling Partnership 1984-1
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         52
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  37
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         215
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 304
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   304
<SALES>                                        142
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               146
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  23
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                77
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            77
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   77
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MANUEL DONASTORG,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D2023-2750

[August 15, 2024]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Hon. Jack B. Tuter, 

Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No. 16-6342CF10A.

Carla Patricia Lowry of Lowry at Law, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Richard C. Valuntas, 

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

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CIKLIN, GERBER and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit
32.2




CERTIFICATION
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 RF Industries, Ltd. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, James Doss, Acting Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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.




Date: June 12 , 2009
                /s/
      James DossJames
      DossChief
      Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.1
           Broadcast International, Inc. & Subsidiaries
            Certification Of Chief Executive Officer
               PURSUANT TO RULE 13a - 14(a) OF THE
          SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED,
                     AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Rodney Tiede, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Broadcast
International, Inc.;

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
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

5.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant'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 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 registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.



Date: May 11, 2006

/s/ Rodney Tiede
-----------------------------
Rodney Tiede
Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000740628
<NAME> INTERFERON SCIENCES RESEARCH PARTNERS, LTD
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Draft Proposal E-1 

This concept has been developed by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) as a possible code

change proposal to the Commercial provisions of the 2012 International Existing Buildings Code (IEBC).   

Interested parties are asked to submit any and all comments on DOE's initial concepts and draft code

change proposals. For instructions on submitting comments, visit:

www.energycodes.gov/development/iebc_concepts

Alteration Definition (E-1) 

Objective: Expand definition of “alteration” to include retrofits and changes to energy systems. 

Suggested Code Change Proposal 

Revise the definition of “alteration” in Section 202 as follows: 

ALTERATION. Any construction, retrofit or renovation to an existing structure other 

than a repair or addition. Also, a change in a mechanical, service water heating, or 

lighting system that involves and extension, addition or change to the arrangement, type 

or purpose of the original installation. Alterations are classified as Level 1, Level 2 or 

Level 3. 

Reason: For consistency with the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). The 

terms “construction” and “renovation” are not defined in the International Existing Buildings 

Code (IEBC) or other International Code Council (ICC) codes and would logically include 

mechanical, water heating, and lighting systems but this is not clearly spelled out and some 

energy using systems might be excluded, given some interpretations of the code. The 

suggested new sentence is intended to clarify this and is consistent with the definition of 

“alteration” in the 2012 IECC. Because the term “retrofit” is also used regularly to generally 

describe work done in existing buildings, its inclusion in the definition along with construction 

and renovation is intended to provide more clarity to what can be confusing when trying to 

determine what is and is not covered by the IEBC with respect to work being done in and to 

existing buildings. 

Cost Impact: There is no cost impact.
### §1300f–1. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 95–375, §2, Sept. 18, 1978, 92 Stat. 712, which related to adoption of tribal constitution and bylaws, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
### §2471. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 99–570, title IV, §4224, Oct. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 3207–148, which related to review of programs providing health services and benefits to Indians, was renumbered section 4208A of Pub. L. 99–570 by Pub. L. 102–573, title VII, §702(b)(1), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4582, and transferred to section 2414a of this title.
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 ELEV

 502.56

 502.35

 502.15

 501.51

 500.28

 500.06

 502.04

 503.34

 504.48

 504.32

 504.72

 504.99

 503.76

 504.34

 504.29

 504.08

 502.19

 502.35

 503.65

 503.42

 503.53

 504.11

 503.73

 503.27

 503.25

 503.45

 503.47

 503.38

 503.73

 503.87

 58,117

 57,882

 57,658

 56,950

 55,607

 55,368

 57,535

 58,998

 60,305

 60,120

 60,583

 60,895

 59,476

 60,143

 60,086

 59,843

 57,703

 57,882

 59,351

 59,089

 59,214

 59,877

 59,442

 58,918

 58,895

 59,123

 59,146

 59,043

 59,442

 59,602

STORAGE

-202

-235

-224

-708

-1,343

-239

+2,167

+1,463

+1,307

-185

+463

+312

-1,419

+667

-57

-243

-2,140

+179

+1,469

-262

+125

+663

-435

-524

-23

+228

+23

-103

+399

+160

CHANGE

152

138

137

179

169

836

2,047

1,656

1,557

800

1,100

998

120

1,183

910

902

107

1,348

2,007

1,176

1,443

1,786

1,218

1,113

1,327

1,565

1,530

1,451

2,571

2,640

INFLOW

 250

 250

 247

 532

 843

 952

 950

 914

 897

 888

 863

 835

 829

 841

 932

 1,020

 1,179

 1,251

 1,259

 1,301

 1,371

 1,434

 1,429

 1,374

 1,333

 1,443

 1,511

 1,498

 1,866

 1,888

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 314

 505

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 186

 159

OUTLET

 4

 6

 3

 4

 3

 4

 4

 4

 1

 5

 4

 6

 6

 6

 7

 5

 7

 7

 7

 7

 9

 18

 8

 3

 6

 7

 7

 5

 4

 7

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

APRIL 2005 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 10/26/2005

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS +1,283 34,166 32,180 819 345 174

ACRE-FEET +1,283 67,768 63,829 1,624 684 345

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 63,829

SPILL 1,624 66,137

 58,319

OUTLET 684

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 26

 26

 26

 26

 26

 732

 1,820

 1,337

 1,311

 646

 960

 881

 27

 1,101

 803

 792

 24

 1,258

 2,001

 1,138

 1,391

 1,618

 1,154

 1,073

 1,263

 1,493

 1,493

 1,429

 2,465

 2,550

 30,890

 61,270

*COMPUTED INFLOW IS SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, AND EVAPORATION.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JUAN MEDINA BUENO,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-15-00211-CR

Appeal from the

292nd District Court

of Dallas County, Texas 

(TC# F-1160087-V)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Court Reporter’s request for an extension of time within 

which to file the Reporter’s Record until January 15, 2016. NO FURTHER REQUESTS 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE REPORTER’S RECORD WILL BE

CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that Kelly Simmons, Court Reporter for the 292nd District Court, 

for Dallas County, Texas, prepare the Reporter’s Record for the above styled and numbered 

cause, and forward the same to this Court on or before January 15, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 29

th day of December, 2015.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
Exhibit 13.1

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned each hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the annual report on Form 20-F of Silicon Motion Technology Corporation for the year ended
December 31, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Silicon Motion Technology Corporation.

Date: April 25, 2012



/s/ Wallace C. KouWallace C. Kou,President & Chief Executive Officer/s/ Riyadh LaiRiyadh Lai,Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being
filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
* 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 February 18, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-40901 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus SILVANO VILLA-NEGRETE, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-03-CR-63-ALL

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Silvano Villa-Negrete appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for being found illegally present in the United States after deportation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). He argues that the district court plainly erred in characterizing his prior state felony conviction for simple possession of marijuana as an aggravated felony within the context of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C). He acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by United States v. Caicedo-Cuero , 312 F.3d 697No. 03-40901 -2- (5th Cir. 2002), cert. denied , 123 S. Ct. 1948 (2003), but wishes to preserve the issue for further review. Caicedo-Cuero determined that simple drug possession qualifies as an aggravated felony under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C). 312 F.3d at 706-11.Thus, the district court did not plainly err in treating VillaNegrete’s prior state conviction for simple possession of marijuana as an aggravated felony. Villa-Negrete also argues for the first time on appeal that a prior state felony conviction for simple possession is not a drug trafficking crime and not an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(B) or 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). He concedes that his argument is foreclosed by current Fifth Circuit law, citing United States v. Rivera , 265 F.3d 310, 312-13 (5th Cir. 2001), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 1146 (2002), and United States v. Hinojosa-Lopez , 130 F.3d 691, 693-94 (5th Cir. 1997). Thus, the district court did not plainly err in applying the eight-level adjustment to his offense level based on his prior state felony drug conviction. Jerome v. United States , 318 U.S. 101 (1943) does not affect the binding precedential value of Rivera and Hinojosa-Lopez

. Villa-Negrete argues, pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are elements of the offense, not sentence enhancements, making those provisions unconstitutional. Villa-Negrete concedes that this argument isNo. 03-40901 -3- foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and he raises it for possible review by the Supreme
Court. This argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , 523 U.S. at 235. We must follow the precedent set in Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000) (internal quotation and citation omitted).
AFFIRMED.