alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 255.3 Nondiscrimination under any program or activity conducted by the Postal Service.

In accordance with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, no qualified individual with a disability shall, solely by reason of his or her disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under, any program or activity conducted by the Postal Service.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

CASE NO. 22-81294-CIV-CANNON

DONALD J. TRUMP,

Plaintiff,

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant. 

_________________________________/

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

Rachel E. Fugate of Shullman Fugate PLLC hereby gives notice of her appearance as 

counsel on behalf of Intervenors American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. and Dow Jones & 

Company, Inc. The certificate of service for all pleadings, orders, and other papers in this action 

should include Rachel E. Fugate at Shullman Fugate PLLC, 2101 Vista Parkway, Ste. 4006, West 

Palm Beach, FL 33411 and rfugate@shullmanfugate.com.

Dated: August 31, 2022.

Respectfully submitted,

SHULLMAN FUGATE PLLC

Rachel E. Fugate

Rachel E. Fugate (FBN 144029)

rfugate@shullmanfugate.com

Shullman Fugate PLLC

 2101 Vista Parkway, Ste. 4006

 West Palm Beach, FL 33411

Tel: 813-935-5098

Attorney for Intervenors American Broadcasting 

Companies, Inc. and Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 54 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 1 of 1
#### § 83.28 [Reserved] (Rule 28).
EXHIBIT 11

                     ALBA-WALDENSIAN, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
          Calculation of Primary and Fully Dilutive Earnings Per Share
                                  (unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                         Three Month Period Ended          Nine Month Period Ended
                                         Sept. 29,         Oct. 1,         Sept. 29,        Oct. 1,
                                           1996             1995              1996           1995

<S>                                    <C>              <C>               <C>             <C>  
Primary Earning Per Share
Weighted average number of common
   shares outstanding                   1,867,403         1,864,502        1,867,403       1,864,094
Net Income(Loss)                       $   23,443        $ (728,743)      $  129,386      $ (639,238)

Primary Earning Per Share              $      .01        $     (.39)      $      .07      $     (.34)

Fully Dilutive Earning Per Share
Weighted average number of common
      shares outstanding                1,867,403         1,864,502        1,867,403       1,864,094  
Common Stock Equivalents(Options)             138             9,811              457          14,835
                                        1,867,541         1,874,313        1,867,860       1,878,929

Net Income(Loss)                       $   23,443          (728,743)      $  129,386      $ (639,238)

Fully dilutive Earnings Per Share      $      .01       $      (.39)      $      .07      $     (.34)

</TABLE>
§ 230.2 Access to information and other responsibilities. ( a ) The Inspector General has authority to have access to all postal records, reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, information, and other material relating to any matter related to the responsibilities of the Inspector General;
( b ) The Inspector General shall be the Investigating Official for purposes of the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7347
DAVID TERRY KIDD, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; MARY SUE TERRY; EDWARD MURRAY; PATTI L. HUFFMAN; KAREN POLINSKI, Defendants - Appellees, and DALE SMITH, Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-92-805-R) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: February 1, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David T erry Kidd, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.23 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order addressingseveral pretrial motions. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1988); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 15, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-31019

Summary Calendar

 

DERRICK JEROME ALLEN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

THEODORE JOHNSON; JIM WILKINSON; 

MONA HEYSE; EDUCATION DEPARTMENT 

WINN CORRECTION CENTER; CORRECTION 

CORPORATION OF AMERICA; LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT 

OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS; 

PONTIAC BUSINESS INSTITUTE,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 02-CV-884

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Derrick Jerome Allen, Louisiana prisoner #295151, appeals

the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) dismissal as frivolous of his 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 civil rights lawsuit. The district court’s dismissal is

reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Norton v. Dimazana, 122

F.3d 286, 291 (5th Cir. 1997). 
No. 02-31019

-2-

Allen argues that the district court erred in dismissing his

claims of retaliation and sexual abuse. He briefs no argument

regarding his claims of excessive force or discrimination, and

those claims are therefore waived. See Yohey v. Collins, 985

F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Although he conclusionally

asserts that the district court erred in denying him class

certification, Allen fails to brief any argument challenging the

district court’s determination that he had not met any of the

requirements for certification under FED. R. CIV. P. 23, and he

has thus waived the argument. See Yohey, 985 F.2d at 224-25.

Allen’s claim of sexual abuse was properly dismissed

because, even if it is assumed that Theodore Johnson touched him

in a sexual manner during routine pat-down searches, Allen has

not alleged sufficiently serious assaultive behavior or resulting

injury to show a constitutional deprivation. See Farmer v.

Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 833-34, 847 (1994); Hudson v. McMillian,

503 U.S. 1, 9 (1992); see also Boddie v. Schneider, 105 F.3d 857,

860-61 (2d Cir. 1997); 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e). The retaliation

similarly fails because Allen has not presented direct evidence

of a retaliatory motive, nor has he sufficiently alleged a

chronology of events from which retaliation may be inferred. See

Jones v. Greninger, 188 F.3d 322, 324-25 (5th Cir. 1999); Woods

v. Smith, 60 F.3d 1161, 1166 (5th Cir. 1995). 
No. 02-31019

-3-

Allen has not demonstrated an abuse of discretion on the

district court’s part. Its judgment is therefore AFFIRMED. 

Allen’s motion for the appointment of counsel is DENIED.

AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,**


**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


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








In connection with the Annual Report of Humatech, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended April 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Williams, Chief Executive 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, 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: September 8, 2004
/s/ David WilliamsBy: David WilliamsIts: Chief Executive Officer




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


|
|
|
|

|
|
# AGENCY:

 National Institutes of Health, Public Health Service, DHHS.

# ACTION:

 Notice.

# SUMMARY:

 The invention listed below is owned by an agency of the U.S. Government and is available for licensing in the U.S. in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 207 to achieve expeditious commercialization of results of federally funded research and development.

# ADDRESSES:

 Licensing information and a copy of the U.S. patent application referenced below may be obtained by contacting J.E. Fahner-Vihtelic at the Office of Technology Transfer, National Institutes of Health, 6011 Executive Boulevard, Suite 325, Rockville, Maryland 20852-3804; Telephone: 301/496-7735 ext. 270; Fax: 301/402-0220; E-mail; jf36z@nih.gov. A signed Confidential Disclosure Agreement is required to receive a copy of any patent application.

## Artificial Salivary Gland

Bruce J. Baum et al. (NIDCR)

Serial No. 60/121,335

Filed 24 Feb 1999

The present application describes an artificial fluid secreting prosthetic device for non-invasive insertion and methods of using this device. Specifically, compositions and methods based on the discovery of an artificial fluid secreting prosthesis are disclosed in this application. Currently, there is no conventional effective treatment for salivary gland hypofunction. And although the transplantation of mammalian salivary glands has also been tried, this option has not proven desirable due to lack of sufficient donor supplies. To date, the inventors have performed experiments that have demonstrated: (1) Subjects having irradiated salivary gland cells can be induced to secrete fluid subsequent to transfer of a gene; (2) heterologous genes can be transferred to salivary gland cells; and (3) an artificial gland has been designed having a support, an attachment surface joined to the support, and a monolayer of allogenic cells, engineered to secrete ions and water unidirectionally, joined to the attachment surface.

Dated: January 11, 2000.

Jack Spiegel, Ph.D.,

Director, Division of Technology Development and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer.

[FR Doc. 00-1425 Filed 1-20-00;8:45am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
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 with the Quarterly Report of CECO Environmental Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dennis W. Blazer, V.P.  Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant
to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Dennis W. Blazer                 
|Dennis W. Blazer                     
|V.P.  Finance and Administration and
|Chief Financial Officer              
|August 11, 2006                      

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



24
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 11340 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. FRANCIS LEO STADLER, JR. , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 1:19

- CR

- 70

- 1

Before ELROD, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Francis Leo Stadler, Jr. , has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th
Cir. 2 011). Stadler has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Stadler ’s claims of ine ffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims w ithout

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 28, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-11340 Document: 00515431653 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/28/2020No. 19

- 11340

2 prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014 )

. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Stadler’s response. We concur with counsel’s

asse ssment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See
5 TH C IR

. R . 42.2. Case: 19-11340 Document: 00515431653 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/28/2020
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1750

STEPHEN S. KYEREME,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Court No. 07-3464)

Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 19, 2008

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stephen S. Kyereme, Petitioner Pro Se. Nathan J. Hochman, Assistant Attorney General, Richard Farber, Gretchen M. Wolfinger, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Tax Division, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Stephen S. Kyereme appeals the tax court’s order

upholding the Commissioner’s assessment of a deficiency and

penalty with respect to Kyereme’s 2004 federal income tax

liability. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the tax

court. Kyereme v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue , (U.S. Tax Ct. No.

07-3464, U.S. Tax Court April 24, 2008). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jul-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-23-2000
<CASH>                                         13,868
<SECURITIES>                                   37,823
<RECEIVABLES>                                  199,613
<ALLOWANCES>                                   8,864
<INVENTORY>                                    119,672
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               581,279
<PP&E>                                         436,494
<DEPRECIATION>                                 268,535
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,598,484
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          626,401
<BONDS>                                        690,505
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    38,088
<COMMON>                                       2,456
<OTHER-SE>                                     127,536
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,598,484
<SALES>                                        648,892
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               705,089
<CGS>                                          613,076
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  640,880
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               65,798
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             18,483
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (16,053)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (4,943)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (11,110)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      (1,057)
<NET-INCOME>                                   (12,167)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0




</TABLE>
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 Amazing  Investments,  Inc. on
Form  10-KSB  for the  period  ending  September  30,  2002,  as filed  with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, B.
Stephen Bailey, President 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 and belief:

         (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.


/S/ B. Stephen Bailey
B. Stephen Bailey
President, Director
(Principal Executive Officer)


April 19, 2004


A signed  original 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
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
---

Exhibit
32








CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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 on Form 10-K of Overhill Farms, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the year ended September 27, 2009 (the “Report”), the undersigned
hereby certify in their capacities as Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to their knowledge:





1. the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 the Company.





Dated:  December
      11, 2009
            By:
            /s/ James RudisJames
      RudisChief
      Executive Officer(principal
      executive officer)Dated:  December
      11, 2009
            By:
            /s/ Tracy E. QuinnTracy
      E. QuinnInterim
      Chief Financial Officer(principal
      financial officer)








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-CR-80144-Smith/Maynard(s)(s)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

JOFF STENN WROY PHILOSSAINT,

Defendant.

GOVERNMENT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION REGARDING ELECTRONICS AT TRIAL

The United States respectfully moves to bring laptop 

computers to court for trial in this matter and to permit trial 

witnesses to retain their personal electronics in the 

courthouse.

A jury trial in the above-captioned case has been scheduled 

for on or about Monday, February 6, 2023. The defendant has pled 

guilty to conspiracies to commit fraud and money laundering and 

is scheduled for trial on a charge of procuring naturalization 

contrary to law. The defendant obtained naturalization by making 

false statements about his role in the fraud and money 

laundering to which he has pled guilty. Accordingly, the 

government expects a document-intensive trial. Almost all the 

evidence is electronic. Accordingly, the government requests the 

Court’s permission to bring laptop computers and computer 

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 176 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/24/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

accessories to trial to help keep track of the evidence and to 

display scanned documents to the jury.

In addition, the government requests that the Court permit 

trial witnesses to retain their personal electronics, such as 

cell phones. These devices will assist the government to 

communicate with the witnesses and ensure they are available to 

testify when needed.

On January 24, 2023, defense counsel Ian Goldstein informed 

the undersigned by email that the defense has no objection to 

this motion.

WHEREFORE, the government respectfully moves to bring 

laptop computers to court for trial in this matter and to permit 

trial witnesses to retain their personal electronics in the 

courthouse.

Respectfully submitted,

MARKENZY LAPOINTE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: s/ Marc Osborne

Assistant United States Attorney

Court ID# A5500796

500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

Tel: (561) 209-1014

marc.osborne@usdoj.gov

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 176 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/24/2023 Page 2 of 2