alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 1:92-cr-01027-MP-AK

EDGAR ARNOLD GARCIA,

Defendant.

________________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 114, Edgar Arnold Garcia’s Motion to Alter or

Amend Judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant

asks this court to amend its order in Doc. 112, dismissing Defendant’s motion for

reconsideration as untimely. Under Rule 59(e), “[a]ny motion to alter or amend a judgment shall

be filed no later than 10 days after entry of the judgment.” FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e). Defendant’s

first motion for reconsideration, Doc. 110, was not filed within ten days of entry of the judgment.

The court has no power to enlarge the ten-day filing period of Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. Therefore, this court was without jurisdiction to entertain Defendant’s first

motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

Defendant’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment, Doc. 114, is dismissed.

DONE AND ORDERED this 8th day of August, 2006

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:92-cr-01027-MP-AK Document 118 Filed 08/08/06 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This financial data schedule contains summary financial information
extracted from the Company's year ended December 31, 1996 consolidated
statement of income (see Annual Report page 59) and the consolidated
Balance Sheet (see Annual Report page 58). This information is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         248,399
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  149,843
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               409,955
<PP&E>                                          70,337
<DEPRECIATION>                                  40,040
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,430,653<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          233,204
<BONDS>                                        607,486<F2>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           692
<OTHER-SE>                                     551,552
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,430,653
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               883,267
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  570,327
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               101,935<F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              39,757
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                171,248
<INCOME-TAX>                                    73,426
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             97,822
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    97,822
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.33
<FN>
<F1>Includes $941,490,000 of cost assigned to contracts acquired, net.
<F2>Includes $150,000,000 in senior notes payable and $457,486,000 in
subordinated notes payable.
<F3>Represents amortization of cost assigned to contracts acquired for the
year ended December 31, 1996.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.1

                          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 Westerbeke Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended January 23, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John H. Westerbeke, Jr., Chairman of the Board, President and Chief
Executive 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 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.

                                       By: /s/ John H. Westerbeke, Jr.
                                           ---------------------------
                                           John H. Westerbeke, Jr.
                                           Chairman of the Board, President
                                           and Chief Executive Officer

January 23, 2003
EXHIBIT
      32





CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
      OF
      2002







I,
      Adam
      R. Cegielski, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report
      of
      Konigsberg Corporation on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended December
      31,
      2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form
      10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
      results of operations of Konigsberg Corporation.





Date:
      February 20, 2007





By:
      /s/ Adam R. Cegielski


Adam
      R.
      Cegielski,


Chief
      Executive Officer and


Principal
      Financial Officer
**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**

 

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of Linn Energy, LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe three months ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kolja Rockov,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.     The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.     The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  May 8, 2008 | By:    | /s/ Kolja Rockov                                      |
|-------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                    |   | Kolja Rockov                                          |
|                    |   | Executive Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
###### Editorial Note on Part 3402

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 3402.14 Budget and budget narrative.

Applicants must prepare the Budget, Form NIFA-2004, and a budget narrative identifying all costs associated with the application. Instructions for completing the Budget are provided with the form.
#### §§ 3560.12-3560.49 [Reserved]
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 this Quarterly Report of Uniwell Electronic Corporation., on Form 10-Q for the Quarter ending October 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Luiz Brasil, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended October 31, 2011, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and October 31, 2011 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of Uniwell Electronic Corporation.



|                  |     |                                                               | 
|----------------- | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|September 5, 2013 | By: | /s/ Luiz Brasil                                               | 
|                  |     | Luiz Brasil                                                   | 
|                  |     | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer               | 
|                  |     | (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer) |
3.102 [Reserved]

Parent topic: Subpart 3.1 - Safeguards
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-05-00756- CR P aulM ic hae l Br own, A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 95338 0, HO NORAB LE WILF ORD F LOW ERS, JUDGE PRESI DING

M E M O R

A N D UM O P I N I O N In August 1995, Paul Mic hael Br own was convicted of eng ag ing i n o rga n ized criminal ac tivity

and sente nced to f

ifty y ear s in prison. In November 2005, Br own filed a

“motion reque sting trial c ourt’s per mission t o seek out-of

-time appe al.” The motion was treated as a notice of appe al and f

orwa rded to this Court. SeeTex. R. App. P . 25.2(e) . It is obviousl y too late to pe rfe ct a direc t appea l. SeeT e x. R. Ap p . P. 2 6 . 2 ( a ) . We also note that the trial c ourt has certified that this is a plea ba rg ain ca se and B rown ha s no rig ht of appea l. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2( d). I f B rown is entitled to an out-of- time appea l, it mus t be g rante d by the cour t of criminal appea ls in a

post-conviction habe as cor pus proce eding . SeeTe x. Cod e Cr im. Proc. Ann. a

rt. 11.07 (West 2005).2 The a ppeal is dismissed.

__________________________________________

Be a Ann Smith, J ustice Be fore J ustices B . A. Smith, P atterson a nd Pury ear Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: De cembe r 6, 2005 Do No t Pu

bli sh
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

August 4, 2005

Before

 Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

 Hon. ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge

 Hon. ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge

Nos. 03-4123 & 04-2358

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

BYRON V. SUTTON,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeals from the United States

District Court for the Northern

District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Nos. 02 CR 1131 & 03 CR 496-1

Elaine E. Bucklo,

Judge.

O R D E R

Byron Sutton pleaded guilty to crack conspiracy and distribution charges, and

in a prior opinion we rejected his arguments that the district court miscalculated

the drug quantity and imposed an illegal restitution award. United States v.

Sutton, 406 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2005). We nonetheless issued a limited remand

because as we now know from United States v. Booker, 125 S.Ct. 738 (2005), the

district court sentenced Sutton in violation of the Sixth Amendment and, despite

being limited to plain-error review given that Sutton failed to timely object to the

sentencing procedures, we were unable to say “whether Sutton’s substantial rights

were affected without consulting the sentencing judge to determine whether she

would have given the same sentence had she known the guidelines were not

UNPUBLISHED ORDER

Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53
Nos. 03-4123 & 04-2358 Page 2

mandatory,” Sutton, 406 F.3d at 475. We retained jurisdiction during the limited

remand.

In response to our limited remand, the district judge informed us that she

cannot represent that she “would have imposed the same sentence” had she known

the sentencing guidelines were not binding. Both parties have filed memoranda

commenting on the district court’s position, and although the government argues

otherwise, we agree with Sutton that, taken in context, the court’s statement is an

expression of intent to impose a lower sentence given the additional discretion

afforded by Booker. Accordingly, we conclude that the concurrent 135-month terms

imposed by the district court constitute plain error. Johnson v. United States, 520

U.S. 461, 466-67 (1997).

Sutton’s sentences are VACATED, and his cases are REMANDED to the

district court for resentencing.
MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2006-0945.

#### State ex rel. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. v. Floyd.

In Mandamus and Prohibition. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus and prohibition. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that an alternative writ be granted and the following briefing schedule is set for presentation of evidence and filing of briefs pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. X:

The parties shall file any evidence they intend to present within 20 days of the date of this entry; relator shall file its brief within 10 days after the filing of evidence; respondents shall file their brief , within 20 days after the filing of relator’s brief; and relator may file a reply brief within 7 days after the filing of respondents brief.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

I, Randolph Gress,
certify that:

1. the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007 (the Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Innophos, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided Innophos, Inc. and will be retained by Innophos, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to
update the foregoing certification except as required by law.

Date: August 10, 2007



/S/ RANDOLPH GRESSRandolph GressChief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18
U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### Pearl Ross, Respondent, v. Morton A. Epstein et al., Appellants.

Order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 15, 1968, affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. The examinations before trial shall proceed at the place specified in the order under review; they shall be commenced at the times to be fixed in a written notice of at least 10 days, which shall adhere to the sequence indicated in said order, such notice to -be given by either side in this action to the other; except that the sequence in which the several defendants shall be examined shall be specified by *536plaintiff, as provided in the order under review; and except further that the examinations may be held at any other times and places as the parties may stipulate. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
# 4.1903 Contract clause.

The *contracting officer**shall* insert the clause at 52.204-21, Basic *Safeguarding* of *Covered Contractor Information Systems*, in *solicitations* and contracts when the contractor or a subcontractor at any tier *may* have *Federal contract information* residing in or transiting through its *information system*.

**Parent topic:**Subpart 4.19 - Basic Safeguarding of Covered Contractor Information Systems
#### §§ 3560.161-3560.199 [Reserved]
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**267 KA 10-01640**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
RONALD M.M., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JANET C. SOMES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (STEPHEN X. O’BRIEN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Richard A. Keenan, J.), rendered May 27, 2010. The appeal was held by this Court by order entered May 9, 2014, decision was reserved and the matter was remitted to Monroe County Court for further proceedings. The proceedings were held and completed.
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed as moot.

Entered: March 20, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Exhibit 32

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Material Sciences Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended May 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Clifford D. Nastas,
Chief Executive 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 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



July 2, 2008By:

/s/ Clifford D. NastasClifford D. NastasChief Executive Officer


In connection with the Report, I, James M. Froisland, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Chief
Information Officer and Corporate Secretary 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 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



July 2, 2008By:

/s/ James M. FroislandJames M. FroislandSenior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Information Officer and Corporate Secretary
# L_2021180EN.01015101.xml

| 21.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 180/151 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 180/151

---

COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2021/814

of 20 May 2021

amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 on Union outreach activities in support of the implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 28(1) and 31(1) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 29 May 2017, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 29 May 2017, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 (1).

| (2) | On 30 July 2020, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2020/1134 (2), amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 and extending the implementation period for the activities referred to in Article 1 thereof until 30 June 2021. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 30 July 2020, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2020/1134 (2), amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 and extending the implementation period for the activities referred to in Article 1 thereof until 30 June 2021.

| (3) | On 31 March 2021, the Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle, and on 6 April 2021, Expertise France, in their respective capacities as Implementing Agencies, requested the authorisation of the Union to extend for a second time the implementation of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/915, until 31 January 2022, due to continuing challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On 31 March 2021, the Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle, and on 6 April 2021, Expertise France, in their respective capacities as Implementing Agencies, requested the authorisation of the Union to extend for a second time the implementation of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/915, until 31 January 2022, due to continuing challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.

| (4) | The continuation of the activities referred to in Article 1 of Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 does not have any implication as regards financial resources until 31 January 2022, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The continuation of the activities referred to in Article 1 of Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 does not have any implication as regards financial resources until 31 January 2022,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Article 5 of Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 is hereby replaced by the following:

‘Article 5

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

It shall expire on 31 January 2022.’.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 20 May 2021.

For the Council

The President

A. SANTOS SILVA

---

(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 of 29 May 2017 on Union outreach activities in support of the implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty (OJ L 139, 30.5.2017, p. 38).

1

(2)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1134 of 30 July 2020 amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/915 on Union outreach activities in support of the implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty (OJ L 247, 31.7.2020, p. 24).

2

---
#### § 3565.207 Form of lien.

The loan originated by the lender for a guarantee must be secured by a first lien against the property.
§ 4280.151 Ineligible projects. Ineligible projects for EA and REDA grants include, but are not limited to: ( a ) Research related projects.
( b ) Feasibility studies of any nature.
( c ) Projects where funding is not targeted directly to assisting agricultural producers or rural small businesses.
( d ) Projects to develop computer software or programs.
( e ) Projects where 50 percent or more of the costs are in-eligible or where project costs as defined in the application do not meet the definition of providing energy audits or renewable energy development assistance.
( f ) Projects which propose to provide energy audits or renewable energy development assistant for residential purposes.
Case 1:20-cv-00151-AW-GRJ Document 1-7 Filed 07/06/20 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:20-cv-00151-AW-GRJ Document 1-7 Filed 07/06/20 Page 2 of 7
Case 1:20-cv-00151-AW-GRJ Document 1-7 Filed 07/06/20 Page 3 of 7
Case 1:20-cv-00151-AW-GRJ Document 1-7 Filed 07/06/20 Page 4 of 7
Case 1:20-cv-00151-AW-GRJ Document 1-7 Filed 07/06/20 Page 5 of 7
Case 1:20-cv-00151-AW-GRJ Document 1-7 Filed 07/06/20 Page 6 of 7
Case 1:20-cv-00151-AW-GRJ Document 1-7 Filed 07/06/20 Page 7 of 7