alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO

STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, Larry M. Rinehart is the President, ChiefExecutive Officer and Director of PFF Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company").

This statement is being furnished in connection with thefiling by the Company of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the yearended March 31, 2003 (the "Report").

By execution of this statement, I certify that:

- the Report fully complies with the requirements of          Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934          (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and    
- the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations          of the Company as of the dates and for the periods covered by the          Report.

This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit tothe Report so that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as theReport is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.It is not intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

| June 25, 2003 
/s/ Larry M. Rinehart
Dated 
Larry M. Rinehart
  |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 5, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41428-41429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16855]

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Draft EIS, Fernow Experimental Forest, Implementation of New 
Research Studies, Monongahela National Forest Land and Resource 
Management Plan, Tucker County, WV

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of correction and extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The agency published a notice of availability for a draft 
environmental impact statement (EIS No. 000185) for the Fernow 
Experimental Forest on June 16, 2000, in the Federal Register (65 FR 
37780). The comment due date in the notice was listed as July 31, 2000. 
Prior to the publication of the notice in the Federal Register the 
agency had sent a copy of the draft EIS to interested parties on June 
7, 2000, but had listed the comment due date as August 2, 2000. To 
avoid confusion about the date the comments are due, the Forest Service 
is

[[Page 41429]]

extending the comment period to August 7, 2000.

DATES: Written comments are due by August 7, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Forest Service, USDA, Timber and Watershed Laboratory, P.O. 
Box 404, Parsons, WV 26287-0404

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Beth Adams, Project Leader, at 
(304) 478-2000.

    Dated: June 28, 2000.
Barbara C. Weber,
Associate Deputy Chief for Research and Development.
[FR Doc. 00-16855 Filed 7-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
```
No. 11-5066.

#### Olvera-Rivera *v.*United States.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration

The Statewide central filing system of Oklahoma has been previously certified, pursuant to Section 1324 of the Food Security Act of 1985, on the basis of information submitted by the Oklahoma Secretary of State, for farm products produced in that State (52 FR 49056, December 29, 1987).

The certification is hereby amended on the basis of information submitted in a May 23, 2000 letter by Anita Charlson, Supervisor, Central Filing System for Agriculture Liens, for additional farm products used or produced in farming operations, or a product of such crop or livestock in its unmanufactured state that is in the possession of a person engaged in farming operations in that State as follows: echinacea, broccoli, eggplant.

This is issued pursuant to authority delegated by the Secretary of Agriculture.

Authority:Sec. 1324(c)(2), Pub. L. 99-198, 99 Stat. 1535, 7 U.S.C. 1631(c)(2); 7 CFR 2.22(a)(3)(v), 2.81(a)(5), 55 FR 22795.

Dated: June 23, 2000.

John Stencel,

Acting Deputy Administrator, Packers and Stockyards Programs.

[FR Doc. 00-16540  Filed 6-29-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-EN-M
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

THOMAS COMPTOIS,

 

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-16-00240-CR

Appeal from the

120th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20150D05389)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time within which to 

file the brief until May 20, 2017. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

FILE THE APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Charles Louis Roberts, the Appellant’s attorney, 

prepare the Appellant’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before May 20, 2017.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 24th day of April, 2017.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.2

               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 10 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 Form 10-QSB of Environmental
Solutions Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period September 30,
2006 (the "Report"), Joey Schwartz Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1). To my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

                                     DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2006


                                     /S/ JOEY SCHWARTZ
                                     --------------------
                                     JOEY SCHWARTZ
                                     CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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
required by Section 906, has been provided to Environmental Solutions Worldwide,
Inc. and will be retained by Environmental Solutions Worldwide, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 21619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8446]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed the Week Ending March 10, 
2011

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of 
Transportation under the Sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation 
Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1382 and 1384) and procedures governing 
proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 
days after the filing of the application.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2012-0035.
    Date Filed: March 7, 2012.
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association.
    Subject: Mail Vote 702--Resolution 100 Standard Condition 
Resolution for Special Fares (Memo 1665) Intended effective date: 1 
April 2012.

Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2012-8446 Filed 4-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on March 28, 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”), AAF Association, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties are Avid Technology, Tewksbury, MA; British Broadcasting Corporation, Tadworth, Surrey, UNITED KINGDOM; CNN/Turner Broadcasting Systems, Atlanta, GA; Discreet Logic, Montreal, CANADA; Matrox, Quebec, CANADA; Microsoft Corporation, Playa Del Rey, CA; Sony Corporation, San Jose, CA; Pinnacle, Mountain View, CA; Quantel, Newbury, Berkshire, UNITED KINGDOM; U.S. National Imaging & Mapping Agency, Reston, VA; and 4MC, Burbank, CA. The nature and objectives of the venture are to promote the development and adoption of open, accessible standards and specifications relating to file interchange formats, including initially the Advanced Authoring Format (collectively, the “Specifications”); to promote such Specifications worldwide; to provide for testing and conformity assessment of implementations in order to ensure compliance with Specifications; to create and own distinctive trademarks; if advisable, to operate a branding program to create high customer awareness of, demand for, and confidence in products designed in compliance with Specifications; and to undertake such other activities as may from time to time be appropriate to further the purposes and achieve the goals set forth above.                

Constance K. Robinson,

Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 00-16467 Filed 6-28-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
No. 11-5060.

#### Avila *v.*United States.

C. A. 7th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
/*!
 * Font Awesome Free 5.15.3 by @fontawesome - https://fontawesome.com
 * License - https://fontawesome.com/license/free (Icons: CC BY 4.0, Fonts: SIL OFL 1.1, Code: MIT License)
 */
@font-face{font-family:"Font Awesome 5 Free";font-style:normal;font-weight:400;font-display:block;src:url(../webfonts/fa-regular-400.eot);src:url(../webfonts/fa-regular-400.eot?#iefix) format("embedded-opentype"),url(../webfonts/fa-regular-400.woff2) format("woff2"),url(../webfonts/fa-regular-400.woff) format("woff"),url(../webfonts/fa-regular-400.ttf) format("truetype"),url(../webfonts/fa-regular-400.svg#fontawesome) format("svg")}.far{font-family:"Font Awesome 5 Free";font-weight:400}
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Raymond McGEE, a/k/a Raymond Washington, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 03-7294.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 28, 2004.

Decided June 4, 2004.

*488James P. Rogers, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Stacey D. Haynes, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Raymond McGee appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for a new trial based on alleged juror bias. McGee was convicted of unarmed bank robbery and conspiracy to commit bank robbery and armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 2113(a), (d) (2000). Fourteen months after being sentenced and five months after we affirmed his convictions, *see United States v. Smith,*43 Fed.Appx. 529 (4th Cir.2002)(per curiam), McGee filed a motion for a new trial. McGee’s motion alleged that one juror was biased against him at trial because of a previous disagreement between the two of them. The juror did not disclose this disagreement during jury selection. After conducting an evidentiary hearing at which McGee and two witnesses testified on his behalf, the district court denied McGee’s motion for a new trial.

We review a district court’s denial of a motion for new trial based on a juror’s failure to fully disclose information during voir dike for an abuse of discretion, or a clear error of law in the exercise of that discretion. *See City of Richmond v. Madison Mgmt. Group, Inc.,*918 F.2d 438, 459 (4th Cir.1990). In order to obtain a new trial “ ‘a party must first demonstrate that a juror failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire, and then further show that a correct response would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause.’ ” *Fitzgerald v. Greene,*150 F.3d 357, 362 (4th Cir.1998) (quoting *McDonough Power Equip., Inc. v. Greenwood,*464 U.S. 548, 556, 104 S.Ct. 845, 78 L.Ed.2d 663 (1984)). In the absence of dishonesty, a criminal defendant may nevertheless establish a Sixth Amendment violation warranting a new trial by showing that a juror was actually biased against the defense. *Fitzgerald,*150 F.3d at 362-63.

We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding McGee’s and his witnesses’ testimony implausible and in denying McGee’s motion for a new trial. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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*
535 

536 

537 

538 

539 

540 

541 

542 

543 

544 

545 

546 

547 

548 

549 

550 

551 

552 

553 

554 

555 

556 

557 

558 

559 

560 

561 

562 

563 

564 

565 

566 

567 

568 

569 

570 

571 

572 

573 

574 

575 

576 

577 

578 

579 

580 

581 

582 

583 

584 

585 

586 

587 

588 

589 

590 

591 

592 

593 

594 

595 

596 

597 

598 

599 

600 

601 

602 

603 

604 

605 

606 

607 

608 

609 

610 

611 

612 

613 

614 

615 

616 

617 

618 

619 

620 

621 

622 

623 

624 

625 

626 

627 

628 

629 

630 

631 

632 

633 

634 

635 

636 

637 

638 

639 

640 

641 

642 

643 

644 

645 

646 

647 

648 

649 

650 

651 

652 

653 

654 

655 

656 

657 

658 

659 

660 

661 

662 

663 

664 

665 

666 

667 

668 

669 

670 

671 

672 

673 

674 

675 

676 

677 

678 

679 

680 

681 

682 

683 

684 

685 

686 

687 

688 

689 

690 

691 

692 

693 

694 

695 

696 

697 

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2010-12-23T16:21:07-0500
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
#### §§ 101.1102-101.1105 [Reserved]
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 130 (Thursday, July 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 41670]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16984]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than July 28, 2000.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (Betsy Buttrill White, Senior 
Vice President) 33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045-0001:
    1. Valley National Bancorp, Wayne, New Jersey; to acquire 9.9 
percent of the voting shares of Shrewsbury Bancorp, Inc., Shrewsbury, 
New Jersey, and thereby indirectly acquire Shrewsbury State Bank, 
Shrewsbury, New Jersey.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (JoAnne F. Lewellen, 
Assistant Vice President) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
55480-0291:
    1. EastBank Corporation, Minneapolis, Minnesota; to become a bank 
holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of 
EastBank, Minneapolis, Minnesota, a de novo bank.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 29, 2000.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 00-16984 Filed 7-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Capital
Corp of the West  Annual  Report for 1996 and is  qualified  in its  entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          12,982,000
<SECURITIES>                                    43,378,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  183,247,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (2,792,000)
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                          11,368,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (5,102,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 265,989,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                        20,974,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   265,989,000
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                22,286,000
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,736,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,513,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,865,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,172,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,163,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,009,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,009,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         1.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         1.27
        


</TABLE>
No. 11-5427.

#### Jeanetta *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-50325

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ROBERT BERNARD ERNST, also known as Robert Bernard Ernst, IV, also 

known as Robert Ernst, also known as Robert B. Ernst,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:18-CR-265-1

Before HAYNES, DUNCAN, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Robert Bernard 

Ernst 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). Ernst has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s 

brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with 

* 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

February 11, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-50325 Document: 00515305649 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/11/2020
No. 19-50325

2

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: 19-50325 Document: 00515305649 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/11/2020