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

This subpart applies to contracts, including contracts with 8(a) contractors under FAR subpart 19.8

and modifications that require a justification and approval (see subpart 6.3), except contracts-

(a) At or below the simplified acquisition threshold; however, the requirements of this subpart apply

to all contracts of any value awarded to an individual;

(b) For the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services (see part 12);

(c) Performed outside the United States and its outlying areas or any part of a contract performed

outside the United States and its outlying areas;

(d) By law enforcement agencies, if the head of the law enforcement agency or designee involved

determines that application of this subpart would be inappropriate in connection with the law

enforcement agency’s undercover operations; or

(e) Where application would be inconsistent with the international obligations of the United States

or with the laws and regulations of a foreign country.

Parent topic: Subpart 23.5 - Drug-Free Workplace
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 APA Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-K for the period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Anil K. Jain, Chief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that:




1.
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or
                15(d) of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
                and




2.
            The
                information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.




Signature: /s/
      Anil K. Jain


Print
      Name: Anil
      K. Jain


Print
      Title: Chief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2



SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



In connection with the Report of Material Sciences Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended May 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald L. Stewart, President and 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 8, 2004By:

/s/ Ronald L. StewartRonald L. StewartPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Director




In connection with the Report,
I, James J. Waclawik, Sr., Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and 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 8, 2004By:

/s/ James J. Waclawik, Sr.James J. Waclawik, Sr.Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
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 Chatsworth Acquisitions I, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Henry F. Schlueter certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of operations of the Company.
 
 Date: June 14, 2012
/s/ Henry F. Schlueter

Henry F. Schlueter Principal Executive Officer
Page 1 of 2

Case No.: 3:20cr56-TKW

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. Case No. 3:20cr56-TKW

GREGORY FOUNTAIN JONES

_____________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

The Defendant, by consent, has appeared before me pursuant to Rule 11, Fed. 

R. Crim. P., and has entered a plea of guilty to Count One, Count Two, and Count 

Five of the indictment. After cautioning and examining the Defendant under oath 

concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I determined the guilty plea 

was knowing and voluntary and the offenses charged are supported by independent 

bases in fact containing each of the essential elements thereof. I therefore 

recommend the plea of guilty be accepted and the Defendant be adjudicated guilty 

and have sentence imposed accordingly.

Dated this 9th day of December 2020.

/s/ Charles J. Kahn, Jr. 

CHARLES J. KAHN, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:20-cr-00056-TKW Document 81 Filed 12/09/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No.: 3:20cr56-TKW

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations may be filed 

within twenty-four hours after being served a copy thereof. Any different 

deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use 

only, and does not control. A copy of objections shall be served upon the 

magistrate judge and all other parties. A party failing to object to a magistrate 

judge's findings or recommendations contained in a report and 

recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) 

waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on 

unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See U.S. Ct. of App. 11th Cir. Rule 

3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.

Case 3:20-cr-00056-TKW Document 81 Filed 12/09/20 Page 2 of 2
2PROB 128
(793)

United States District Court
for the
Northern District of Florida

Request for Modifying the Conditions or Term of Supervision

with Consent of the Offender
(Probation Form 49, Waiver of Hearing is Attached)

Name of Offender: Joe Lee McQuay Case Number: 1:02CR43-001(S)
Name of Sentencing Judicial Officer: The Honorable Maurice M. Paul, Senior United States District Judge
Date of Original Sentence: October 31, 2003 Type of Supervision: Supervised Release

Date Supervision Commenced: September 16,2011 Date Supervision Expires: September 15, 2021

Original Offense:

Count 1: Conspiracy to Distribute and Possession with Intent to Distribute More Than Fifty (50) Grams of
Cocaine Base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§841(b)(1)(A) (iii) and 846; a Class “A” Felony.

Count 2: Distribution of More Than Fifty (50) Grams of Cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §841(b)(1)(A)(iii);
a Class “A” Felony.

Original Sentence: 180 months imprisonment as to each count, concurrent, followed by 10 years supervised
release. Later reduced to 120 months imprisonment as to each count, concurrent, pursuant to a Rule 35 Motion.

———

PETITIONING THE COURT

To modify the defendant’s term of supervised release in the following manner:

“You shall reside at the Residential Reentry Center (RRC) for a period of 90 days and shall obey the rules
of that facility. While at the Center, you shall be placed in the Community Confinement Component of the
program, follow all center rules, and the probation officer’s instructions regarding the implementation of
this Court directive. Further, you shall contribute towards the cost of subsistence and may be required to
pay for a physical examination at your own expense prior to entering the program. Cost of transportation
to and from the RRC shall be the responsibility of the defendant.

CAUSE

The defendant violated his terms of supervision by traveling outside the district of residence without the
permission of the probation officer, and by committing the new law offenses of Resisting Arrest and Driving
While License Suspended or Revoked. The defendant has agreed to the above punitive sanction to address
this non-compliance.

PIS TEz0T


Prob 12B
Re: MCQUAY, Joe Lee
October 19, 2011

Page 2
Respectfully submitted,
by
—

Glenn H. McInnes

Senior U.S, Probation Officer
Date: October 19, 2011

THE COURT ORDERS

[ ]. No Action

[ ] The Extension of Supervision as Noted Above
PD = The Modification of Conditions as Noted Above

[ ] Other
steam

_ record - Re: RRI Request for ICR Extension

Greetings,

This e-mail is a confirmation that your exte nsion request for the steam electric effluent guidelines questionnaire was received. Extension requests will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Please be aware that submittal of an ex tension request to EPA does not alter the due date of your questionnaire unless and until EPA agre es to the extension and establishes a new date.
Sincerely,

-----"Smith, James R. (Randy)" <JRSmith@rrienergy.com> wrote: -----

To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA From: "Smith, James R. (Randy )" <JRSmith@rrienergy.com> Date: 06/25/2010 12:22PM Subject: RRI Request for ICR Extension From: <Alicea.Jezebele @ epamail.epa. g ov> To: "Smith, James R. (Randy)" <JRSmith@rrienergy.com> Date: 6/28/2010 3:48 PM Sub j ect: Re: RRI Request for ICR Extension Pa g e 1 of 2

3/17/2011 file://C:\Documents and Settin g s\TMedle y \Local Settin g s\Tem p \XP g r p wise\4C28C440DO

...Alicea, please find attached RRI corr espondence for EPA’s consid eration to extend the deadline to complete and comply for the RRI steam -electric generat ing facilities Effluent ICR requirements.

If there are any que stions, do not hesitat e to contact me.

Randy Smith Engineering & Technical Services 832-357-4632 (NEW) 832-357-7420 Fax

[ attachment "RRI corporate Extension Re quest Letter.pdf" re moved by Jezebele A licea/DC/USEPA/US] Pa g e 2 of 2

3/17/2011 file://C:\Documents and Settin g s\TMedle y \Local Settin g s\Tem p \XP g r p wise\4C28C440DO

...
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 23, 2022.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-2318

Lower Tribunal Nos. DOAH 21-0905, HSMV MS-21-024

________________

Perotte Driving and Traffic School, Inc.,

Appellant,

vs.

Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the State of Florida, Department of Highway Safety 

and Motor Vehicles.

Twig, Trade, & Tribunal, PLLC, and Morgan L. Weinstein (Fort 

Lauderdale), for appellant.

Christie S. Utt, General Counsel, and Elana J. Jones, Assistant 

General Counsel (Tallahassee), for appellee.

Before SCALES, HENDON, and GORDO, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.
2

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           29352
<SECURITIES>                                       560
<RECEIVABLES>                                      735
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 30647
<PP&E>                                            4800
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   35662
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1142
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       33576
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     35662
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  7880
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1204
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   256
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   6420
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               6420
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      6420
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.59
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     4.59
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   In connection with the Quarterly Report of EntreMetrix Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, Scott W. Absher, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Dated:  November 19, 2007By:  Scott W. AbsherIts:  President   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to EntreMetrix Corporation and will be retained by EntreMetrix Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 5:88cr05040-01/RV

KUNTA ALLAH MUWWAKIL 

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Senior Judge Roger Vinson on July 6, 2009

Motion/Pleadings: [Second] Motion to Reduce Sentence (re Retroactive Application of

Sentencing Guidelines to Crack Cocaine Offense 18 USC 3582) 

 

Filed by Defendant on 7/01/2009 Doc.# 272

RESPONSES:

 on Doc.# 

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

 s/Jerry Marbut

Deputy Clerk: Jerry Marbut

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 6th day of 

 July , 2009, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b) The Defendant’s amended offense level of 37 and his amended criminal history

category of VI result in an unchanged Guideline Range of 360 months to Life.

(c)Additionally, the Defendant also qualified as a career offender under the

Guidelines, with a Guideline Range of 360 months to Life. 

 /s/ Roger Vinson

ROGER VINSON

Senior United States District Judge

Case 5:88-cr-05040-RV-EMT Document 273 Filed 07/06/09 Page 1 of 1
4.303 Contract clause.

Insert the clause at 52.204-4, Printed or Copied Double-Sided on Recycled Paper, in solicitations and

contracts that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold.

Parent topic: Subpart 4.3 - Paper Documents
EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 17
#### Hopkins vs. Smith *et al.*

Tn0VEKCase 83.

Error to the Montgomery Circuit; Robbins., Judge.

*'Evidence. Witness. Levy. Plaintiff in execution,*

in trover by trustee of wi,’e>,or contrust°nroiiertv of wire, the husband is [1e°r['ti!iv]0(0nTM^ef for trustees!

April 25.

Chief Justice Robertson

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action of trover, brought by the defendants in error, against the plaintiff, for some cattle sold by a constable, under execution, in favor of the plaintiff against one Garret, for whose wife the defendants, as her trustees, claimed the cattle.

The jury found a verdict for $15 in damages, and the court refused to award a new trial.

Whether there was sufficient proof to show that the plaintiff in the action had a legal right to the cattle, we shall not now consider. For if there was, Garret, the husband of the *cestui que trust,*was not a competent witness for the trustees, and therefore the circuit court, in that view of the case, erred in deciding that he was competent, and if there was not sufficient proof of the title of the trustees to the cattle sued for by them, the verdict could not be sustained; and, in either event, the judgment would be erroneous; and whatever may be the effect of the proof, as to the title of the trustees, we are of opinion that there was not sufficient proof of a conversion by the plaintiff in error. As creditor in the *264execution, he was not liable for conversion by the constabIe, unless he had, in some wav, been instruin the sale of the cattle. The only fact, tending in any degree to show any such agency, is ^iat> wben he delivered the execution to the constable, the plaintiff said, “levy it on *Garret’s cattle.”*There is no proof that he directed the levy to lie mac^e 011 Ibe ca^^e which were levied on by the constable, or that he advised or sanctioned the levy as made, or intended to direct a levy on any other cattle than such as belonged to Garret: there is not even any proof that Garret was in the possession of the cattle levied on, at the time the instruction was given by the plaintiff, or that he had no other cattle.

p.aim ff in "'ThiV ilíeen.” l^vy°r of officer, iinJ Tor wa'a'in*" st.ruuieiitul i"n the levy.

*Jas. Trimble,*for plaintiff.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial, which the circuit court erred in refusing to award, on the motion of the plaintiff in error.
#### § 4279.187 Refusal to execute Loan Note Guarantee.

If the Agency determines that it cannot execute the Loan Note Guarantee, the Agency will promptly inform the lender of the reasons and give the lender a reasonable period within which to satisfy the objections. If the lender satisfies the objections within the time allowed, the Agency will issue the Loan Note Guarantee. If the lender requests additional time in writing and within the period allowed, the Agency may grant the request.
###### Editorial Note on Part 3405

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3405 appear at 76 FR 4808, Jan. 27, 2011.

#### § 3405.3 Institutional eligibility.

Proposals may be submitted by land-grant and other U.S. colleges and universities offering a baccalaureate or first professional degree in at least one discipline or area of the food and agricultural sciences. Each applicant must have a demonstrable capacity for, and a significant ongoing commitment to, the teaching of food and agricultural sciences generally and to the specific need and/or subject area(s) for which a grant is requested. Awards may be made only to eligible institutions as defined in § 3405.2(i).
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-21-00101-CR

PHILLIP MICHAEL NUNEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 196th District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court No. 32289CR

Before Morriss, C.J., Stevens and Carter,* JJ.

_________________

*Jack Carter, Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment
O R D E R

Phillip Michael Nunez has filed an appeal from a judgment of conviction entered by the 

196th Judicial District Court of Hunt County. Nunez retained Kristin R. Brown to represent him 

on appeal, but Brown has filed a motion to withdraw with this Court averring that she was unable 

to find any non-frivolous issue to raise on appeal. Brown’s motion satisfies the requirements of 

Rule 6.5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, and we hereby grant the motion to 

withdraw. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5.

In light of these circumstances, we abate this case to the trial court so that it may conduct 

whatever hearings are necessary to make the following determinations: (1) whether Nunez still 

desires to prosecute this appeal and, if so, (2) whether Nunez is indigent and entitled to the 

appointment of counsel to represent him on appeal. If the trial court determines that Nunez is 

indigent, then it shall appoint counsel to represent him on appeal.

The trial court may enter any orders necessary to implement these directives. Any 

hearing shall be conducted by the trial court within fifteen days of the date of this order. 

Appropriate orders and findings shall be sent to this Court in the form of a supplemental clerk’s 

record within ten days of the date of the hearing contemplated by this order. The reporter’s

record of any hearing shall be filed with this Court within ten days of the date of the hearing 

contemplated by this order.

All appellate timetables are stayed and will resume on our receipt of the supplemental 

appellate record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: March 15, 2022
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

CHARLIE BURKE, 

JENNY HANSSON, 

d/b/a CHERRY PEPPERS,

Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. 5:03cv182/MCR/WCS

CHARLES E. COOKE, 

and G. EDWARD COOKE,

Defendants.

 /

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Sixth

Report and Recommendation. The Plaintiff has previously been furnished a copy of

the Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file

objections. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), I have made

a de novo determination of those portions to which an objection has been made.

Having considered the Sixth Report and Recommendation and all objections

thereto timely filed by the parties, I have determined that the Sixth Report and

Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's Sixth Report and Recommendation is adopted

and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. All of the supplemental state law tort claims are hereby DISMISSED for

failure to state a claim. The complaint is hereby DISMISSED as to Plaintiff Charlie

Case 5:03-cv-00182-RS-WCS Document 89 Filed 05/25/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 5:03cv182/MCR/WCS

Burke. This case shall proceed solely on the contract claims of Plaintiff Jenny

Hansson.

3. Plaintiff Hansson shall have until July 1, 2005, to file an amended

complaint consistent with the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation. This

case is hereby REMANDED to the Magistrate Judge for review of Plaintiff Hansson’s

amended complaint.

4. The motion for judgment on the pleading filed by former Defendant

Glaus, doc. 68, is hereby DENIED as moot. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of May, 2005.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:03-cv-00182-RS-WCS Document 89 Filed 05/25/05 Page 2 of 2