alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Commissioner King’s May 26, 2023 Instagram Post

Christine King (@iamchristineking) and SEOPW CRA (@miamicra), INSTAGRAM (May 26, 

2023) , https://www.instagram.com/p/Cstt71krZJU/ (tagging @miamicra, @naacp, 

@naacp_miami_dade):

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 172-10 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 1 of 1
#### § 101-28.202-4 Reimbursement for services.

Reimbursement for services rendered shall be made promptly after receipt of billing. The frequency for billing and reimbursement shall be established by the activity providing warehousing and storage services; however, billing and reimbursement shall be made not less frequently than quarterly nor more frequently than monthly.

[42 FR 2317, Jan. 11, 1977]
No. 11-9167.

#### Deese *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO.: 22-cv-23753-MOORE/LOUIS

EDWIN GARRISON, et al., on behalf of 

themselves and all other similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SAM BANKMAN-FRIED, et al.,

Defendants.

/

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that NATHAN M. BULL of the Law Firm of MCDERMOTT 

WILL & EMERY LLP hereby makes an appearance as counsel of record for Defendant STEPHEN 

CURRY, and directs that all responsive pleadings and papers in the above action be served upon 

the following:

Nathan M. Bull

333 S.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 4500

Miami, FL 33131

nbull@mwe.com

mblancoaleman@mwe.com

Respectfully submitted,

McDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP

/s/ Nathan M. Bull

NATHAN M. BULL

nbull@mwe.com

Florida Bar No. 1029523

333 S.E. 2nd Avenue | Suite 4500

Miami, FL 33131

Tel: (305) 358-3500 | Fax: (305) 675-8146

Counsel for Defendant Stephen Curry

Case 1:22-cv-23983-KMM Document 22 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2023 Page 1 of 2
2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 7th day of April, 2023, an electronic copy of the 

foregoing document was filed with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send 

notification of such filing to all counsel of record at their e-mail addresses on file with the Court. 

/s/ Nathan M. Bull 

NATHAN M. BULL

DM_US 195405294-1.119576.0012

Case 1:22-cv-23983-KMM Document 22 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2023 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 21, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 38598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15608]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--VSI Alliance

    Notice is hereby given that, on January 27, 2000, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), VSI Alliance has filed 
written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the 
Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership status. 
The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, 3Com Corporation, 
Santa Clara, CA; Jean-Paul Calvez (individual member), Nantes, France; 
Pai Chou (individual member), Irvine, CA; ControlNet, Inc., Milpitas, 
CA; DSP Group, Inc., Herzlia, Israel; Element 14, Inc., Cambridge, 
United Kingdom; and IDEC (IC Design Education Center), Taejon, Republic 
of Korea have been added as parties to this venture. Also, Analog 
Circuit Technology, San Diego, CA; The Boeing Company, Seattle, WA; 
Chip & Chip, Inc., Santa Clara, CA; IMS--Integrated Measurement 
Systems, Inc., Beaverton, OR; Iprias Ltd., Bristol, United Kingdom; 
Maingate Electronics, Inc., Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan; Metis 
Associates, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA; NeoParadigm Labs, Inc., San Jose, CA; 
Sagantec North America, Inc., Fremont, CA; Silicon Access Technology, 
San Jose, CA; SiPCore, Inc., San Jose, CA; Stellar Semiconductor, San 
Jose, CA; and VLSI Technology, Inc., San Jose, CA have been dropped as 
parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and VSI Alliance intends to file 
additional written notification disclosing all changes in membership.
    On November 29, 1996, VSI Alliance filed its original notification 
pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of 
the Act on March 4, 1997 (62 FR 9812).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on October 8, 
1999. A notice has not yet been published in the Federal Register.

Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 00-15608 Filed 6-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b)/RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED

In connection with the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Analogic Corporation (the Company) for the quarter ended October 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, James W.
Green, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of his 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.

Date: December 10, 2010



/s/ James W. GreenJames W. GreenPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
Page 1 of 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-24023-CIV-WILLIAMS

KENNETH C. GRIFFIN, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, et al., 

Defendants. 

__________________________________/

ORDER RECUSING JUDGE AND REASSIGNING CASE

The undersigned District Judge, to whom the above-styled case has been assigned, 

recuses herself and refers the case to the Clerk of Court for reassignment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 455.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Miami, Florida, this 13th day of December, 2022. 

In accordance with the Local Rules for the Southern District of Florida, providing for the 

random and equal allotment of cases, this cause is hereby reassigned to the calendar of United 

States District Judge . 

All documents for filing in this case shall carry the following case number and designation: 

. 

By Order of Court this ___ day of December, 2022. 

ANGELA E. NOBLE

Court Administrator/Clerk of Court

By: 

Deputy Clerk

Robert N. Scola, Jr. 

22-cv-24023-Scola/Goodman

/s/Valerie Kemp

Case 1:22-cv-24023-RNS Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/13/2022 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 564 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 564

              To repeal the Federal estate and gift taxes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 1999

Mr. Thornberry introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
              To repeal the Federal estate and gift taxes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF ESTATE AND GIFT TAXES.

    (a) In General.--Subtitle B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to estate, gift, and generation-skipping taxes) is hereby 
repealed.
    (b) Effective Date.--The repeal made by subsection (a) shall apply 
to estates of decedents dying, gifts made, and generation-skipping 
transfers made after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
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 Quarterly Report of Emtec, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dinesh R. Desai, Chief Executive 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 result of operations of the Company.

|   |   |   |                                   |
|--------|--------|--------|----------------------------------------|
|        |   |   | /s/ Dinesh R. Desai                    |
|   |   |   | Chief Executive OfficerAugust 19, 2005 |

 

----
IIB

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 592

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 1, 1999

Received

JULY 13 (legislative day, JULY 12), 1999

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

AN ACT

To designate a portion of Gateway National Recreation Area

as ‘‘World War Veterans Park at Miller Field’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 592 RFS

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF PORTION OF GATEWAY NA2 TIONAL RECREATION AREA AS WORLD WAR

3 VETERANS PARK AT MILLER FIELD.

4 Section 3(b) of Public Law 92–592 (16 U.S.C.

5 460cc–2(b)) is amended—

6 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(b)’’; and

7 (2) by adding at the end the following new

8 paragraph:

9 ‘‘(2) The portion of the Staten Island Unit of the

10 recreation area known as Miller Field is hereby designated

11 as ‘World War Veterans Park at Miller Field’. Any ref12 erence to such Miller Field in any law, regulation, map,

13 document, record, or other paper of the United States

14 shall be considered to be a reference to ‘World War Vet15 erans Park at Miller Field’.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives June 30, 1999.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
#### § 102-75.960 May landholding agencies make improvements or alterations to excess or surplus property in those cases where disposal is otherwise not feasible?

Yes, landholding agencies may make improvements or alterations that involve rehabilitation, reconditioning, conversion, completion, additions, and replacements in excess or surplus structures, utilities, installations, and land improvements, in those cases where disposal cannot be accomplished without such improvements or alterations. However, agencies must not enter into commitments concerning improvements or alterations without GSA's prior approval.
Opinion issued November 17, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-22-00393-CV

———————————

IN RE JACOB R. COX AND SERVICEPLUS, LLC, Relators

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators, Jacob R. Cox and ServicePlus, LLC, filed a petition for a writ of 

mandamus challenging two discovery orders signed by the trial court on April 25, 

2022, including: (1) an “Order Compelling Production,” which granted the motion 
2

to compel of real party in interest, Bestway Oilfield, Inc., and (2) an order denying 

relators’ motion to compel.

1

 

In connection with their mandamus petition, relators also filed an “Emergency

Motion for Temporary Relief,” requesting that, pending consideration of their

mandamus petition, the Court stay enforcement of the trial court’s April 25, 2022 

“Order Compelling Production.” The Court granted relators’ motion on May 26, 

2022, staying enforcement of the “Order Compelling Production.”

We deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus and lift the stay imposed by 

our May 26, 2022 order. Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Hightower, and Guerra.

1 The underlying case is Bestway Oilfield, Inc. v. Jacob R. Cox and ServicePlus, LLC, 

Cause No. 2020-32320, in the 270th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the 

Honorable Dedra Davis presiding.
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS113034 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
#### § 109-39.103 Agency appeals.

The Office of Management and Program Secretarial Officer (PSO) for their respective organizations may appeal, or request exemption from, a determination made by GSA concerning the establishment of a fleet management system. A copy of the appeal or request shall be forwarded to the DPMO.
Nature of Reaction

Sanitized
Exhibit 99.2


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


                I, Rocco J. Nittoli, as Principal Financial Officer of Allcity
Insurance Company (the "Company") certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as
adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

                (1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the period ending June
30, 2002 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (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: August 14, 2002
                                           /s/ Rocco. J. Nittoli
                                           -----------------------------------
                                           Rocco J. Nittoli,
                                           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
  (1)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, 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 25, 2011
    By:
    /s/ Arthur A. Koch, Jr.Arthur A. Koch, Jr.Senior Vice President, Finance, and
Chief Financial Officer
Order entered May 16, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01491-CV

GARY C. EVANS, Appellant

V.

THE FROST NATIONAL BANK, Appellee

On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 09-15818

ORDER

The Court has before it appellant’s May 14, 2013 unopposed motion for extension of 

time to file his brief. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS appellant to file his brief 

by May 29, 2013. No further extensions will be granted absent a showing of exceptional 

circumstances.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-50502

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Debra Lea Jackson-Jennings, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 7:23-CR-33-2

______________________________

Before Willett, Duncan, and Ramirez, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Debra Lea Jackson-Jennings 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. 2011). Jackson-Jennings has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 10, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-50502 Document: 44-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2024
No. 23-50502

2

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to 

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities 

herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 23-50502 Document: 44-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/10/2024
<PAGE>

                                                                   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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Allis-Chalmers
Corporation. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 the operations of the Company.


DATE: AUGUST 16, 2005        BY:  /S/ MUNAWAR H. HIDAYATALLAH
                                ----------------------------------
                                MUNAWAR H. HIDAYATALLAH
                                CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


DATE: AUGUST 16, 2005        BY:  /S/ VICTOR M. PEREZ
                                ----------------------------------
                                VICTOR M. PEREZ
                                CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
#### § 128-48.001-5 Forfeited property.

Personal property acquired by a bureau, either by administrative process or by order of a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to any law of the United States.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                              912169
<SECURITIES>                                        188942
<RECEIVABLES>                                        23645
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   1128566
<PP&E>                                              699745
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     1899449
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                47373
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             12610
<OTHER-SE>                                          579939
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       1899449
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    161049
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        91929
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      69120
<INCOME-TAX>                                         19171
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  49949
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         49949
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.04
        


</TABLE>
§ 105-60.304 Time requirements to respond to FOIA requests. ( a ) Upon receipt of perfected request via U.S. mail, email, or facsimile, the GSA FOIA Requester Service Center shall begin processing the request for records. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(A)(i), GSA has 20 business days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays) to inform the requester of the agency's determination with respect to the request for records, unless in the alternative, the agency has negotiated a different timeframe based on scope and level of effort to prepare the FOIA request response. If a requester does not receive a response to their perfected FOIA request within the statutory timeframe requester may seek judicial review in the U.S. District Court in the district in which the requester resides or has a principal place of business, or where the records are situated, or in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
( b ) GSA shall to the greatest extent practicable respond to FOIA requests by order of receipt of the requests.
( c ) GSA shall designate a specific track for requests that are granted expedited processing, in accordance with the standards set forth in this subpart. GSA may also designate additional processing tracks that distinguish between simple and more complex requests based on the estimated amount of work or time needed to process the request. Among the factors GSA may consider are the number of records requested, the number of pages involved in processing the request, and the need for consultations or referrals. GSA shall advise requesters of the track into which their request falls upon request, and when appropriate, offer the requester an opportunity to narrow the scope and/or modify their requests.
( d ) GSA may aggregate requests in cases where it reasonably appears that multiple requests for records were submitted either by a requester or by a group of requesters acting in concert for the same, or similar information to ensure it is fulfilled in a timely manner. GSA cannot aggregate multiple requests for unrelated subject matters.