alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.1

March
23, 2003

Via
EDGAR
Securities and Exchange Commission
Judiciary Plaza
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549



Ladies
and Gentlemen:

In
connection with the Annual Report of Mesa Offshore Trust (the 'Trust') on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the 'Report'), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:



The
above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate
disclosure document.

| |  | JPMorgan Chase Bank,
Trustee for Mesa Offshore Trust
| |  | ----------------------------------------------------
| |  | By:                                                 

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
balance sheet, statement of income and statement of cash flows contained in
Form 10-Q of Cambridge Electric Light Company for the nine months ended
September 30, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000016573
<NAME> CAMBRIDGE ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                          <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                 SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      9-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                    PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>         95,903
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>       10,158
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>            25,324
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>          61,285
<OTHER-ASSETS>                    64,772
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   257,442
<COMMON>                           8,665
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>         62,919
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>               10,839
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>    82,423
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0
<PREFERRED>                            0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>               7,201
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                     0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>              0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>         0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>        100
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>              0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>            0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                       0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>   167,718
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>    257,442
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>         77,613
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>              (1,020)
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>        75,880
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>        74,860
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>            2,753
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                 1,071
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>     3,824
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>           4,627
<NET-INCOME>                        (803)
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>            0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>       (803)
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>           4,540
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>            602
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>            (1,947)
<EPS-BASIC>                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0



</TABLE>
Case: 1:12-cv-03107 Document #: 48 Filed: 06/08/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:1396
Case: 1:12-cv-03107 Document #: 48 Filed: 06/08/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:1397
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                OCT-1-1999
<CASH>                                           5,060
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   80,017
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,276
<INVENTORY>                                    110,373
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               225,294
<PP&E>                                         416,335
<DEPRECIATION>                                 260,892
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 424,033
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          102,126
<BONDS>                                         17,105
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        22,516
<OTHER-SE>                                     198,641
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   424,033
<SALES>                                        335,628
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               335,628
<CGS>                                          267,557
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  326,683
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (138)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   425
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,697
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,961
<INCOME-TAX>                                       793
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,168
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,168
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32**

June 15, 2007

Via EDGAR

Securities andExchange CommissionJudiciary Plaza450 Fifth Street, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20549

Re:      Certification pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In connection with the Annual Report of Mesa OffshoreTrust (the “Trust”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31,2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely asthe trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to itsknowledge:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)         The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Trust.

Theabove certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part ofthe Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.
|        |     | JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.       |
|--------|----------|---------------------------------|
|   |     | Trustee for Mesa Offshore Trust |
|   |     | By:                             |   | /s/ MIKE ULRICH |
|   |     |                            |   | Mike Ulrich |
|   | * * | * *                        | * * | *Vice President* |
|   | * * | * *                        |   | *The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A.,  as attorney-in-fact for the Trustee* |

 

----
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF ACR GROUP, INC. PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of ACR Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending February28, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Anthony R. Maresca, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to my knowledge 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) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 

 

 

A signedoriginal 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 Section906, has been provided to ACR Group, Inc. and will be retained by ACR Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except tothe extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
APPENDIX B 

A REFERENCE ON HOW TO INCORPORATE CREDIBLE HUMAN ENZYME 

STUDIES INTO THE PHYSIOLOGICALLY-BASED PHARMACOKINETIC (PBPK) 

MODELING AND RISK ASSESSMENT PROCESS 

Lipscomb, J.C., L.K. Teuschler, J. Swartout, D. Popken, T. Cox and G.L. Kedderis. 

2003. The impact of cytochrome P450 2E1-dependent metabolic variance on a riskrelevant pharmacokinetic outcome in humans. Risk. Anal. 23(6):1221-1238. 

B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9
B-10
B-11
B-12
B-13
B-14
B-15
B-16
B-17
B-18
B-19
#### The People of the State of New York v. Martin Sostre.

Motion for reargument denied. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.
FAA Home
Airports
Resources
Series 150 Advisory Circulars (ACs) for Airport Projects

# AC 00-46D - Aviation Safety Reporting Program (Cancelled)

- ShareShare
- 

- Facebook					Share on Facebook
- Twitter					Tweet on Twitter

## Document Information

- Number
- 00-46D
- Title
- Aviation Safety Reporting Program
- Date cancelled
- 2011-12-16
- Cancellation notes
- AC 00-46E
- Date issued
- 1997-02-26
- Office of Primary Responsibility
- ASY-300
- Description
-  	Describes the Federal Aviation Administration’s Aviation Safety Reporting program, which utilizes the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as a third party to receive and analyze Aviation Safety Reports. This cooperative safety reporting program invites users of the National Aviation System to report to NASA actual or potential discrepancies and deficiencies involving the safety of aviation operations 
- Content
-    -  AC00-46D.pdf  (PDF) 

## View All

      - Current Series 150 ACs
      - Cancelled Series 150 ACs
      - Draft Series 150 ACs
      - Advisory Circulars

## Export All

      - Current Series 150 ACs  (CSV)
      - Cancelled Series 150 ACs  (CSV)

## Top Requests

      - AC 150/5300-13B, Airport Design
      - AC 150/5320-6G, Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation
      - AC 150/5370-10H, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports
      - AC 150/5340-1M, Standards for Airport Markings
      - AC 150/5340-30J, Design and Installation Details for Airport Visual Aids
      - AC 150/5390-2C, Heliport Design
#### In the Matter of Hannah Saltanoff v. Robert E. Herman, as State Rent Administrator.

Motion for a stay denied. The petitioner-appellant may perfect the appeal for argument on June 21, 1962, on condition that she procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before June 12, 1962, with notice of argument for June 21, 1962. Respondents’ points are to be served and filed on or before June 18, 1962. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
##### 



Page 23

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Michael O. Moore, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Secretary of The Cato Corporation, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, U.S.C. Section 1350, that on the date of this
Certification:



|1. |  | the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended May 1, 2004 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 7, 2004 |  |                                      
|                   |  | /s/ Michael O. Moore                 
|                   |  |                                      
|                   |  | Michael O. Moore                     
|                   |  | Executive Vice President             
|                   |  | Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000

Loan Principal

Min Earnings to Pass at 12/30 DTE minimum earnings to pass total debt/earnings > 1

Minimum earnings necessary to pass DE, various metrics

15 year amortization; .0445 int. rate
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Roy Robinson, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered February 10, 1961 after a jury trial, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and of assault in the third degree, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. In our opinion, *People*v. *Krevoff*(11 A D 2d 1053) is distinguishable. In the case at bar there is evidence from which the conclusion may be fairly drawn that there was a breaking; in the *Krevoff*case there was no such evidence. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur.
S. J. Res. 1 

One Hundred Fifteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and seventeen 

Joint Resolution 

Approving the location of a memorial to commemorate and honor the members 

of the Armed Forces who served on active duty in support of Operation Desert 

Storm or Operation Desert Shield. 

Whereas section 8908(b)(1) of title 40, United States Code, provides 

that the location of a commemorative work in Area I, as depicted 

on the map entitled ‘‘Commemorative Areas Washington, DC 

and Environs’’, numbered 869/86501 B, and dated June 24, 2003, 

shall be deemed to be authorized only if a recommendation for 

the location is approved by law not later than 150 calendar 

days after the date on which Congress is notified of the recommendation; 

Whereas section 3093 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ 

McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 

(40 U.S.C. 8903 note; Public Law 113–291) authorized the 

National Desert Storm Memorial Association to establish a memorial on Federal land in the District of Columbia, to honor the 

members of the Armed Forces who served on active duty in 

support of Operation Desert Storm or Operation Desert Shield; 

and 

Whereas the Secretary of the Interior has notified Congress of 

the determination of the Secretary of the Interior that the memorial should be located in Area I: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That the location 

of a commemorative work to commemorate and honor the members 

of the Armed Forces who served on active duty in support of 

Operation Desert Storm or Operation Desert Shield authorized 

by section 3093 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (40 U.S.C. 

8903 note; Public Law 113–291), within Area I, as depicted on 
S. J. Res. 1—2 

the map entitled ‘‘Commemorative Areas Washington, DC and Environs’’, numbered 869/86501 B, and dated June 24, 2003, is approved. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
**EXHIBIT 32.2****CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT**I, Michael O. Moore, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of The CatoCorporation, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section1350, that on the date of this Certification:1. the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended July 30, 2005 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and 2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.   Dated: September 7, 2005       /s/ Michael O. Moore     Michael O. Moore
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-51098

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

VICTOR MENDEZ-VALERA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. DR-00-CR-199-ALL-WWJ

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

August 21, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Victor Mendez-Valera has

requested leave to withdraw as counsel and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Mendez-Valera has filed a pro se response. Our independent

review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Mendez-Valera’s

response discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel’s

motion to withdraw is GRANTED. Counsel is excused from further

responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR.
No. 00-51098

-2-

R. 42.2. Mendez-Valera’s motion for appointment of counsel is

DENIED.
#### Phœbe Fellows, Appellant, *v.*Richard C. Fellows, Respondent.

(Submitted June 7, 1883;

decided June 12, 1883.)

*John Townshend*for appellant.

*John E. Burrill*for respondent.

Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.
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





I, Robert J. Davis, the Chief Financial Officer of Liberator Medical Holdings, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.             This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and





2.             The information contained in this Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: August 15, 2011
/s/ Robert J. DavisRobert J. Davis, Chief Financial Officer
#### 1852.246-72 Material inspection and receiving report.

As prescribed in 1846.674, insert the following clause:

# Material Inspection and Receiving Report (APR 2015)

(a) At the time of each delivery to the Government under this contract, the Contractor shall prepare and furnish a Material Inspection and Receiving Report (DD Form 250 series). The form(s) shall be prepared and distributed as follows:

(Insert number of copies and distribution instructions.)

(b) The Contractor shall prepare the DD Form 250 in accordance with NASA FAR Supplement 1846.6. The Contractor shall enclose the copies of the DD Form 250 in the package or seal them in a waterproof envelope, which shall be securely attached to the exterior of the package in the most protected location.

(c) When more than one package is involved in a shipment, the Contractor shall list on the DD Form 250, as additional information, the quantity of packages and the package numbers. The Contractor shall forward the DD Form 250 with the lowest numbered package of the shipment and print the words “CONTAINS DD FORM 250” on the package.

(End of clause)

[54 FR 28340, July 5, 1989, as amended at 60 FR 40521, Aug. 9, 1995; 62 FR 14035, Mar. 25, 1997; 68 FR 45169, Aug. 1, 2003; 80 FR 12953, Mar. 12, 2015; 81 FR 3339, Jan. 21, 2015]
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).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

RONALD GAITHER,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 08-50441

D.C. No. 2:08-cr-00380-R-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 10, 2011** 

Pasadena, California

Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

The government appeals the district court’s dismissal of its charge of

aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1) against defendant Ronald

Gaither (“Gaither”). The district court dismissed this count of the indictment

FILED

MAR 22 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

because (1) the predicate offenses were not related to terrorism; and (2) the stolen

identity belonged to a deceased victim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §

1291, and we reverse and remand. 

First, the predicate charges brought against Gaither, bank fraud and theft of

government funds, are expressly listed among those that serve as a basis for an

identity theft charge under § 1028A(a)(1). 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028A(c)(1), (5). The

district court’s belief that the statute applies only to terrorism-related offenses,

rather than “straight bank fraud,” is plainly incorrect.

Second, Gaither’s argument that § 1028A(a)(1) does not criminalize the theft

of identity documents belonging to a deceased person is foreclosed by United

States v. Maciel-Alcala, 612 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir. 2010), which held that the term

“person” as used in § 1028A(a)(1) includes both living and deceased persons. 

After the Supreme Court in Flores-Figueroa v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1886,

1888–94 (2009) interpreted § 1028A(a)(1) so that the term “knowingly” modified

all subsequently listed elements of the crime, including “of another person,” we

were charged in Maciel-Alcala with further interpreting the term “person” to make

clear what exactly the defendant had to know. Contrary to Gaither’s argument,

therefore, Maciel-Alcala’s holding that “person” in § 1028A(a)(1) includes both

living and deceased persons is not merely dicta, but was the precise question under
3

review. Although this case presents a different set of facts because the person

whose identity Gaither stole was in fact dead at the time of the unlawful use,

Maciel-Alcala’s holding as to how § 1028A(a)(1) should be construed as a matter

of law controls. 

Because the district court’s reasoning is contrary to the plain text of the

statute and our holding in United States v. Maciel-Alcala, 612 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir.

2010), its dismissal of the charge under § 1028A(a)(1) is REVERSED and the

case is REMANDED for further proceedings not inconsistent with this disposition.