alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS

ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael J. Wagner, Chief Executive Officer of The Parent Company in compliance with 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The
Parent Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended May 3, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of the 17th day of June 2008.



/s/ Michael J. WagnerMichael J. WagnerChief Executive Officer
[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:Department of Defense nuclear/biological/chemical (NBC) defense annual reportto Congress [electronic resource]**
 
SuDoc:D 1.1/15:
ItemNumber: 0306-A-37 (online)
CGPsystem Number: 000576451
 
1996
1997
1998
1999
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:93-cr-01021-MP

BENJAMIN LOPERA-OCHOA,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Motion to Vacate Judgment Pursuant to Rule 36, in

Pari Materia to Rule 60(b) Fed. R. Civ. Proc. By Benjamin Lopera-Ochoa, Doc. 93. Mr. LoperaOchoa’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus was dismissed with prejudice ten years ago, Doc.

89. Next, Mr. Lopera-Ochoa petitioned for a writ of error audita querela, which has been

abolished, Doc. 91; see Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(e). 

Now comes Mr. Lopera-Ochoa to ask that the Court adapt Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 60(b), allowing relief from civil judgment, to grant him relief from this criminal

judgment. The accompanying memorandum of law discussed the writ of error audita querela,

arguing that the Court should reverse its earlier denial of relief, and re-sentence Mr. LoperaOchoa according to the non-retroactive current Sentencing Guidelines. The Court may not do

so. 

Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the

writ of habeas corpus is the avenue for criminal defendants to challenge convictions that have

been made final at the completion of their direct appeals. Here, Mr. Lopera-Ochoa has pursued
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:93-cr-01021-MP

that avenue, and has not succeeded in getting relief. These subsequent successive efforts to

attack collaterally the validity of his conviction are ineffective and disallowed. Accordingly, the

Motion to Vacate Judgment, Doc. 93, is DENIED. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 2nd day of June, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
98-1092.

#### State v. Rimmer.

Lorain App. No. 97CA006795. The discretionary appeal is allowed on Proposition of Law No. I only. Cause held for the decision in 97-1985, *State v. Cook,*Allen App. No. 1-97-21; briefing schedule stayed.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1948

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1948 appear at 80 FR 9888, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1948.54 Eligible applicants.

Organizations eligible for grants include local governments, councils of local government, and State governments that have the leval authority necessary to undertake the proposed project.

[46 FR 33022, June 26, 1981]
OAO 247 (02/08) Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

United States of America )

)

)

)

)

)

v.

SHAWN LAKIEA GETTIS Case No: 3:97cr17/RV

USM No: 04072-017

Date of Previous Judgment: June 10, 1997 Chet Kaufman, Assistant Federal Public Defender

(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Applicable) Defendant’s Attorney

Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

Upon motion of : the defendant 9 the Director of the Bureau of Prisons 9 the court under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has

subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 994(u), and having considered such motion,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:

: DENIED. 9 GRANTED and the defendant’s previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in 

the last judgment issued) of months is reduced to .

I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE (Prior to Any Departures)

Previous Offense Level: 34 Amended Offense Level: 34

Criminal History Category: VI Criminal History Category: VI

Previous Guideline Range: 262 to 327 months Amended Guideline Range: 262 to 327 months

II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE

9 The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range.

: The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the time

of sentencing as a result of a departure or Rule 35 reduction.

9 Other (explain):

III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Because the defendant was subject to a mandatory minimum of Life imprisonment, defendant Gettis is ineligible for a

sentence reduction. See United States v. Williams, 549, F.3d 1337, 1342 (11th Cir. 2008).

Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated June 10, 1997 shall remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Order Date: June 18, 2009 /s/ Roger Vinson

Judge’s signature

Effective Date: Roger Vinson, Senior United States District Judge

(if different from order date) Printed name and title

Case 3:97-cr-00017-RV Document 44 Filed 06/18/09 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

KERMIT LEE SANFORD,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:20-cv-68-AW-GRJ

MARK S. INCH, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

I have considered the magistrate judge’s April 1, 2020 Report and 

Recommendation. ECF No. 5. There have been no objections. I agree with the report 

and recommendation: Plaintiff has not alleged any constitutional violation. It is now 

ordered that the Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 5, is adopted and 

incorporated in this Order. The clerk will enter a judgment that says, “This case is 

dismissed for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(2)(B)(ii).” The 

clerk will then close the file.

SO ORDERED on May 18, 2020.

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-00068-AW-GRJ Document 6 Filed 05/18/20 Page 1 of 1
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joe Goodman, Appellant.

-Appeal held, decision reserved, and matter remitted to Monroe County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the Memorandum herein. Memorandum: This appeal was remitted to County Court for *693a *Hwntley*hearing to determine the voluntariness of defendant’s statement (25 A D 2d 480). Upon the hearing County Court determined that the statement was voluntarily made. An integral part of that hearing was defendant’s claim that he had requested counsel before making the statement. The People’s witness categorically denied that such a request had been made, as claimed by defendant. County Court failed to make a finding as to whether the People had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant did not request counsel before he made his statement. (See *People*v. Neureuter, 26 A D 2d 899; *People*v. *Spears,*26 A D 2d 893; *People*v. *Michalski,*26 A D 2d 766.) The matter is remitted to Monroe County Court for a finding on this specific question of request for counsel, and the appeal is held pending the submission of this finding to this court. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court and a jury, convicting defendant of assault, second degree. Resubmission to court after order of Rosenthal, J., holding that the confession was voluntary.) Present — Williams, P. J., Goldman, Henry, Del Yecehio and Marsh, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Cruz, Appellant.

Order entered January 25, 1968, denying without a hearing appellant’s motion for a writ of error *coram nobis,*unanimously reversed on the law the judgment of conviction is vacated and the matter remanded to the trial court for reimposition of sentence, *nunc pro tumo,*upon the guilty verdict rendered by the jury. While conceding defendant’s right to relief, trial term denied defendant’s application holding that his request should be addressed to the Appellate Division. In this the court below erred. The District Attorney concedes that defendant’s request for a free trial transcript was denied thereby compelling defendant to prosecute his appeal without the benefit of his trial minutes. He also concedes that such denial violated the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. (See *Griffin*v. *Illinois,*351 U. S. 12; *Eskridge*v. *Washington Prison Bd.,*357 U. S. 214.) Recently the Court of Appeals has ruled that defendants who claim that their appeals were improperly dismissed should utilize *coram nobis*application as distinguished from an application made directly to the Appellate Division for reinstatement of an appeal. (See *People v. Lampkins,*21 N Y 2d 138,142 [1967].) *A coram nobis*application to the trial court will protect appealability to the Court of Appeals, whereas a motion to reinstate the appeal, being a nonfinal order, will not be appealable’as a matter of right. By following the procedure herein mandated this *“*Destitute defendant must be afforded as adequate appellate review as defendants who have money enough to buy transcripts.” *(Griffin, supra,*p. 19). (Concur — iStevens, P. J., Markewich, Nunez and Steuer, JJ.
§ 3201.35 Bathroom and spa cleaners. ( a ) *Definition.* Products that are designed to clean and/or prevent deposits on surfaces found in bathrooms and spas including, but not necessarily limited to, bath tubs and spas, shower stalls, shower doors, shower curtains, and bathroom walls, floors, doors, and counter and sink tops. Products in this item may be designed to be applied to a specific type of surface or to multiple surface types. They are available both in concentrated and ready-to-use forms.
( b ) *Minimum biobased content.* The preferred procurement product must have a minimum biobased content of at least 74 percent, which shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon in the finished product.
( c ) *Preference compliance date.* No later than May 14, 2009, procuring agencies, in accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for qualifying biobased bathroom and spa cleaners. By that date, Federal agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing specifications for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications require the use of biobased bathroom and spa cleaners.
[73 FR 27994, May 14, 2008]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:98cr121/RV

DONALD DARRELL MCCREA 

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Senior Judge Roger Vinson on November 10, 2008

Motion/Pleadings: Motion to Reduce Sentence (re Retroactive Application of Sentencing

Guidelines to Crack Cocaine Offense 18 USC 3582) 

Filed by Defendant on 4/01/2008 Doc.# 56/57

RESPONSES:

 None on Doc.# 

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

 s/Jerry Marbut

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Jerry Marbut

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 10th day of

 November , 2008, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b)Amendment 706 has no effect upon the defendant’s sentencing guideline 

 range. 

 /s/ Roger Vinson

ROGER VINSON

Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:98-cr-00121-MCR Document 62 Filed 11/10/08 Page 1 of 1
MEMORANDUM

Subject: Summary of Stakeholder Meeting

From: Martha Keating

To: Docket EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2008

- 0699

Date: June 16, 2015

On June 15 , 2015, representatives of EPA attended a meeting with representatives of the Carroll

Area D evelopment Corporation (Carroll County, Iowa)

. The meeting was held by

videoconference. Attendees discussed the designations process for the ozone National Ambient

Air Quality Standards, state implementation plan development, and current air quality data for

Carroll County. There were no meeting materials.

The following is a list of attendees and their affiliation.

Name Affiliation

Doug Burns Daily Times Herald

Adam Schweers City of Carroll

Gerald Clausen City of Carroll

Mark Sheeder Struve Labs

Rick Hunsaker Region XII COG

Ed Smith St. Anthony Regional Hospital

Shannon Landauer Carroll Area Development Corporation

Gene Meiners Carroll County Supervisor

Dr. Rexanne Struve Struve Labs

Sara Terry EPA /Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

(OAQPS)

Martha Keating EPA/OAQPS

Scott Mathias EPA/OAQPS

James Hemby EPA/OAQPS

Kevin Bailey EPA/Office of Congressional Affairs

Lachala Kemp EPA/Region 7
§ 3201.52 Disposable tableware. ( a ) *Definition.* Products made from, or coated with, plastic resins and used in dining, such as drink ware and dishware, including but not limited to cups, plates, bowls, and serving platters, and that are designed for one-time use. This item does not include disposable cutlery, which is a separate item.
( b ) *Minimum biobased content.* The preferred procurement product must have a minimum biobased content of at least 72 percent, which shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon in the finished product.
( c ) *Preference compliance date.* No later than October 18, 2011, procuring agencies, in accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for qualifying biobased disposable tableware. By that date, Federal agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing specifications for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications require the use of biobased disposable tableware.
[75 FR 63701, Oct. 18, 2010]
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

                        FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Farmers & Merchants
Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Barbara J. Britenriker, Chief
Financial Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as added
by 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirement 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: February 27, 2008


                                        /s/ Barbara Britenriker
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Barbara Britenriker
                                        Chief Financial Officer


                                       75
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**     I, Jeff D. Morris, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Alon USA Energy, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations 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 andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: August 22, 2005               /s/ Jeff D. Morris   Jeff D. Morris   President and Chief Executive Officer
#### § 29.3009 Clean.

Tobacco is described as clean when it contains only a normal amount of sand or soil particles. Leaves grown on the lower portion of the stalk normally contain more dirt or sand than those from higher stalk positions. (See Rule 20.)

[24 FR 8771, Oct. 29, 1959. Redesignated at 49 FR 16757, Apr. 20, 1984]
###### Editorial Note on Part 3402

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3402 appear at 76 FR 4807, Jan. 27, 2011.

#### § 3402.13 National need narrative.

HEP will determine the composition of the narrative for each competition, including page limits, font size, the number and the order of sections, and other supporting information that may be required. Detailed instructions for preparing the narrative will be published in the solicitation.
```

[108th Congress Public Law 314]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ314.108]

[[Page 118 STAT. 1198]]

Public Law 108-314
108th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To authorize the exchange of certain lands within the Martin Luther 
  King, Junior, National Historic Site for lands owned by the City of 
Atlanta, Georgia, and for other purposes. <<NOTE: Oct. 5, 2004 -  [H.R. 
                                1616]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress <<NOTE: Martin Luther King, Junior, 
National Historic Site Land Exchange Act. 16 USC 461 note.>> assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Martin Luther King, Junior, National 
Historic Site Land Exchange Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
            (1) Public Law 96-438 established the Martin Luther King, 
        Junior, National Historic Site, and allows acquisition, by 
        donation only, of lands owned by the State.
            (2) The National Park Service owns a vacant lot that has no 
        historic significance. The City of Atlanta has expressed 
        interest in acquiring this property to encourage commercial 
        development along Edgewood Avenue.
            (3) The National Historic Site Visitor Center and Museum is 
        land-locked and has no emergency ingress or egress, making it 
        virtually impossible for firefighting equipment to reach.
            (4) The acquisition of city-owned property would enable the 
        National Park Service to establish easy street access to the 
        National Historic Site Visitor Center and Museum, and would 
        benefit the City by exchanging a piece of property that the City 
        could develop.

    (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to authorize the exchange 
of certain lands within the Martin Luther King, Junior, National 
Historic Site for lands owned by the City of Atlanta, Georgia.

[[Page 118 STAT. 1199]]

SEC. 3. LAND EXCHANGE.

    Section 2(b)(1) of the Act of October 10, 1980 (Public Law 96-428; 
94 Stat. 1839; 16 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking the period and 
inserting ``or exchange.''.

    Approved October 5, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 1616:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 108-255 (Comm. on Resources).
SENATE REPORTS: No. 108-332 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:
                                                        Vol. 149 (2003):
                                    Oct. 28, considered and passed 
                                        House.
                                                        Vol. 150 (2004):
                                    Sept. 15, considered and passed 
                                        Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### § 30.12 Fire-cure.

To cure tobacco under artificial atmospheric conditions by the use of open fires, the smoke and fumes of which are allowed to come in contact with the tobacco.
#### Bernard Titlebaum, Individually, and as Parent and Natural Guardian of Andrew Titlebaum, an Infant, et al., Respondents, v Loblaws, Inc., et al., Appellants, and Custom Beverage Packers, Third-Party Defendant.

Motion for reargument granted to extent that decision entered May 9, 1980 [75 AD2d 985] amended to affirm the granting of cross motion of defendant Loblaws, Inc., against Custom Beverage Packers on the theory of breach of warranty and the cross motion of Custom Beverage Packers *1024against Anchor Hocking Corp. on the theory of breach of warranty. Present —Hancock, Jr., J. P., Schnepp, Callahan, Doerr and Witmer, JJ.