alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


        
<CAPTION>
<ARTICLE>         5
<LEGEND>
                  This schedule contains summary financial information
                  extracted from  Millenium Istec Inc.'s  June 30, 1998
                  financial statements  and is qualified  in its  entirety
                  by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>


<CIK>                    0000894551
<NAME>                   Millenium Istec Inc.

       

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                                        2315
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 7305
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                                  17973
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                             35785
<PP&E>                                                       44286
<DEPRECIATION>                                               (2594)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              900860
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       541973
<BONDS>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                      4000
<OTHER-SE>                                                  305783
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                900860
<SALES>                                                      29412
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                             29412
<CGS>                                                        13077
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                13077
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            197146
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            7499
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            (189850)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        (189850)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                               (189850)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 (.05)
                                      
        

</TABLE>
#### § 3743.3 Stipulation between parties.

If at any time prior to a hearing the person requesting publication of notice and any person filing a verified statement pursuant to such notice shall so stipulate, then to the extent so stipulated, but only to such extent, no hearing shall be held with respect to rights asserted under that verified statement, and to the extent defined by the stipulation the rights asserted under that verified statement shall be deemed to be unaffected by the notice published pursuant to that request.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Earl Etters, Respondent, against Trailways on New England, Inc., Appellant. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

*930All concur.
---

Exhibit 13.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. §1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the annual report of Alberta Star Development Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gordon Steblin, 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: (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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. /s/ Gordon SteblinGordon Steblin
Chief Financial OfficerPrincipal Accounting and Financial OfficerApril 5, 2013 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. The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of the annual report or as a separate disclosure document.


---
#### § 4130.8-3 Service charge.

(a) Under section 304(a) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, BLM may establish reasonable charges for various services such as application processing. BLM may adjust these charges periodically to account for cost changes. BLM will inform the public of any changes by publishing a notice in the Federal Register.

(b) The following table of service charges is applicable until changed through a Federal Register notice as provided in [paragraph (a)](/on/2024-09-06/title-43/section-4130.8-3#p-4130.8-3(a)) of this section. Except when the action is initiated by BLM, the authorized officer will assess the following service charges:

| Action | Service charge |
| --- | --- |
| Issue crossing permit | $75 |
| Transfer grazing preference | 145 |
| Cancel and replace or supplement a grazing fee billing | 50 |

[[71 FR 39507](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/71-FR-39507), July 12, 2006]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO. 20-61123-CIV-CANNON/Hunt

JOHN AGNES,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

____________________________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Magistrate Judge’s Reports and 

Recommendation [ECF Nos. 37–38]. On December 17, 2021, Plaintiff filed his Motion for 

Summary Judgment [ECF No. 28], and on January 12, 2022, Defendant filed his Motion for 

Summary Judgment [ECF No. 29]. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remand 

[ECF No. 31]. All three motions were referred to Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt for a Report 

and Recommendation pursuant to the Court’s Order of Reference [ECF No. 26]. On March 1, 

2022, Judge Hunt issued a Report and Recommendation on the Cross-Motions for Summary 

Judgment [ECF No. 37] and a Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand 

[ECF No. 38]. In sum, Judge Hunt recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgement 

[ECF No. 28] be denied, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 29] be granted, 

and Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand [ECF No. 31] be denied.

The Reports and Recommendations also state that the parties shall file any objections 

within seven days of the date of service of a copy of the Report and Recommendations 

[ECF No. 37 p. 11; ECF No. 38 p. 5]. Neither party has filed an objection, and the period for doing 

Case 0:20-cv-61123-AMC Document 39 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/10/2022 Page 1 of 2
CASE NO. 20-61123-CIV-CANNON/Hunt

2

so has expired. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); S.D. Fla. Magistrate Judge Rule 4(b); Thomas v. Arn, 

474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); Henley v. Johnson, 885 F.2d 790, 794 (11th Cir. 1989); 

11th Cir. R. 3-1 (2016).

The Court has reviewed the record in this case and is otherwise fully advised in the 

premises. Upon review, the Court finds the Reports and Recommendation to be well reasoned and 

correct. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Reports and Recommendations [ECF Nos. 37–38] are ACCEPTED.

2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 28] is DENIED.

3. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 29] is GRANTED.

4. Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand [ECF No. 31] is DENIED.

5. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 10th day of March 2022.

 _________________________________

 AILEEN M. CANNON

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 0:20-cv-61123-AMC Document 39 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/10/2022 Page 2 of 2
# U n i ted S ta te s Cou r t o f Appe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 22-5013 September Term, 2021 1: 21-cv -025 83-UNA Filed O n: March 22 , 20 22 Davi d Hall Crum ,

App ellant v

. United Sta tes,

App ellee ON A PPE A L FROM THE UNITED STA TES DIS TRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: T ate l and Pillard, Circuit Ju dges, a nd Sen telle, Sen ior Circuit

Judge J U D G M E N T T his ap pea l was co nside red o n th e reco rd f rom the United Sta tes District Cou rt for th e District of

Colum bia a nd on the brief f iled b y ap pellan t. S ee Fed. R. Ap p. P

. 34(a )(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34 (j). Upon consid eratio n o f the foregoing an d th e m otion to clarif y , which the cou rt con strues as a m otion for rem and , it is ORDERED A ND A DJUDGED tha t th e d istrict court’s o rder f iled Novem ber 3 , 202 1 b e a f

f irmed an d th e m otion for rem and be de nied . A ppe llant h as n ot id ent if ied any error in th e d istrict court’s d ismissal o f his p etition for injun ctive relief . T o th e e xten t app ellantsee ks to challen ge a se nte nce imp osed by the District of Colum bia S upe rior Court, the ap prop riate a venu e is b y way of a m otion in th at co urt p ursua nt t o D.C. Co de § 2 3-11 0. App ellantha s no t de mo nstrat ed tha t his re me dy unde r D.C. Code § 2 3-11 0 is inad equate or ine f

fective to t est t he legality of his se nte nce. Se e D.C. Co de § 2 3- 110 (g ); Blair-Bey v . Qu ick, 15 1 F.3 d 1 036 , 10 42-4 3 (D.C. Cir. 19 98). Pursua nt t o D.C. Circuit Ru le 36 , th is dispo sition will no t be pu blished . T he Clerk is directe d to w ithho ld issua nce of the m and ate he rein u ntil seven d ays af ter reso lution of an y tim ely petition for rehe aring or pe tition for rehe aring en ban c. S ee Fed. R. Ap p. P. 4 1(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41

. Per Curiam FOR THE COURT: Mark J. La nger, Clerk BY: /s/ Daniel J. Reidy Depu ty Cl erk
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Tower Bridge

Bryce Canyon National Park
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Drive the Scotts Bluff Summit Road

Scotts Bluff National Monument
Exhibit 32.1



November 14, 2005



VIA EDGAR

Securities and Exchange Commission

450 Fifth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20549



|Re: | Segue Software, Inc. Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Ladies and Gentlemen:



In connection with the annual report of Segue Software, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph K. Krivickas, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company hereby certify that:



1. the Companys 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 results of operations of the Company.



This certification is provided solely pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed a part of the Report.



Sincerely,/s/    JOSEPH K.
KRIVICKASJoseph K. KrivickasChief Executive Officer
```

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

1. Premium Standard Farms, Inc., a Delaware corporation*

2. Premium Standard Farms of North Carolina, Inc., a Delaware corporation**

3. LPC Transport, Inc., a Delaware corporation**

4. Lundy International, Inc., a North Carolina corporation**

5. Oldham's, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company***

6. L&H Farms, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company***

7. L&S Farms, a North Carolina general partnership****

8. Crystal Peak Technologies, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ***

*        a direct, wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant

**       an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant

***      an indirect, 50% owned subsidiary of the Registrant

****     an indirect, 60% owned subsidiary of the Registrant
```
EXHIBIT 32.1 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 Annual Report of InstaCare Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Keith Berman, Principal Executive and Chief 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:  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.    /s/ Keith Berman Keith Berman  Chief Financial Officer and Principal Executive Officer October 7, 2008
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to this park navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to this park information section
Skip to the footer section






National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Valles Caldera
National Preserve
New Mexico


Info
Alerts
Maps
Calendar
Fees


Alerts In Effect Dismiss
 more information on current conditions...
 Dismiss View all alerts


Contact Us
  Operating Hours & Seasons
 From dawn to dusk every day of the year, you can explore the park through pedestrian pass-through gates. These gates are located at
Valle Grande Entrance
Coyote Call Trailhead
Two Track Across Valle Grande Trailhead
Valle Grande Trailhead
Banco Bonito
Redondo Meadows
Sulphur CanyonLearn about the accessibility of the gates and other accessibility efforts going on at the park on the Accessibility page.
Motorized Vehicles
Motorized vehicles can travel into the park at the Valle Grande Entrance almost every day of the year from 9 am to 5 pm. From Memorial Day to Labor Day, the park is open to motorized vehicles from 8 am to 6 pm.
The scheduled days when the vehicle gate is **closed**:
Thanksgiving Day
December 25thWhen dangerous driving conditions exist in the park, particularly during the winter season, the vehicle entrance is subject to closure or delayed opening. Check our Current Conditions webpage for any park closures, delays, or information that may affect your visit.
Backcountry Vehicle Route
From May 15 to November 15, the park's backcountry can be reached by motorized vehicle. A backcountry vehicle pass obtained from Recreation.gov is required. The route goes from the cabin district on the northern side of Valle Grande, through the central part of the park, and up into Valle San Antonio and Valle Toledo (conditions permitting).
Visitor Services
There are two main visitor service facilities in Valles Caldera National Preserve:

Addresses
Directions
Hours & Seasons
Description
Closures & Seasonal Exceptions
Amenities
Contact Information
Image Gallery
Addresses
Directions
Hours & Seasons
Description
Closures & Seasonal Exceptions
Amenities
Contact Information
Image Gallery
 Last updated: May 17, 2023
 Park footer Contact Info Mailing Address: 090 Villa Louis Martin Dr.
Jemez Springs,
NM
87025
 Phone: 505-670-1612
Ranger Station (for general park information) Contact Us
 Tools FAQ
Site Index
 Stay Connected


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Rene GARCIA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-40444.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Philip G. Gallagher, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jose Rene Garcia-Hernandez (Garcia) pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation and was sentenced to 70 months of imprisonment and a three-year term of supervised release.

Garcia argues for the first time on appeal that the district court erred in ordering him to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample as a condition of supervised release and that this condition should therefore be vacated. This claim is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it is not ripe for review. *See United States v. Riascos-Cuenu,*428 F.3d 1100, 1102 (5th Cir.2005), *petition for cert, filed*(Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662).

Also for the first time on appeal, Garcia challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). His constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Garcia contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert, denied,*— *231U.S. --126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Garda properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

oplnloa Ror 047el 

R*I ~~thhority 0r thr Tsnr ?ribaa 

Board to pornit mIlllet l&or 

ta k uhedl in hanehtlng erope 

for prltstr inflir1eu6lrr 

x0 an in roorlpt of pour letter of Jul9 17, 1w!:, 

srkl~ tllo follow* ro~uart of tldr bapartcont: 

ViUl 9011 ploarr adrlrr me what&w or not 

the Tsa r r tia bo aa r hd o the l utharlty to 

pernit prlroa lrbor ta br umd in hanehtlnn, 

oropr tar lndlrl6ualh 

=Thlr nq\uo* 18 firwpt4d b9 00&Q of lrttrr 

hornto rtkrhed. ' 
F’ 529 

,
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications.  Archivedcopies of publications are retrieved in the event that publications are nolonger available from the original publishing agency site. (Historicalpurposes)
**Title:Choosing a Medigap policy: ... guide to health insurance for people withMedicare**** 
SuDoc: HE22.8/17:
Item Number:0512-A-03
CGP systemNumber: 000606554
 
2004 | 2007 | 2011 | 2013 | 2017 | 2020
 
September 14,2017**
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7388

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

WILLIS MARK HAYNES,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District 

Judge. (8:98-cr-00520-PJM-1)

Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 24, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Willis Mark Haynes, Appellant Pro Se. James Andrew Crowell, IV, 

Deborah A. Johnston, Sujit Raman, Assistant United States 

Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland; Sandra Wilkinson, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Willis Mark Haynes appeals the district court’s text order

denying his postjudgment motion to dismiss the indictment. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED