alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<page>                                    EXHIBIT 32.02


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 Dean Witter Diversified
Futures Fund III L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-K for the
period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Kevin
Perry, Chief Financial Officer, Demeter Management Corporation, the
general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2)	The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Partnership.


By: /s/ Kevin Perry

Name: 	 Kevin Perry
Title:	 Chief Financial Officer

Date:	 March 31, 2006
#### Robert COSTINE, Appellant, v. Ngaere COSTINE, Appellee.

Nos. 72-1030, 73-107 and 73-108.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 10, 1973.

L. E. Brown, Tavares, for appellant.

H. L. Pringle, Leesburg, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Oral argument is dispensed with pursuant to F.A.R. 3.10(e), 32 F.S.A., and the judgment is affirmed.

LILES, A. C. J., and HOBSON and BOARD MAN, JJ., concur.
#### Lawrence LANE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-1.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 24, 1973.

James A. Gardner, Public Defender, and Elliott C. Metcalfe, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Frank B. Kessler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs and record on appeal and find no reversible error to be shown.

The judgment appealed is therefore

Affirmed.

MANN, C. J., and McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from United 
Investors Growth Properties II 1997 Year-End 10-KSB and is qualified in its 
entirety by reference to such 10-KSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000862114
<NAME> UNITED INVESTORS GROWTH PROPERTIES II
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,508
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          81,277
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,583
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,340
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                          5,914
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,269
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,340
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,675
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,704
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 467
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (29)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.40)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT 

This Notice refers to Treasury Application Number (TAN) ____________________ submitted by 

(name of applicant) _________________________________ to the United States Department of 

the Treasury for payment under Section 1603 of Division B of the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009. 

The payment due or to become due under the application described above has been assigned to 

the undersigned under the provisions of the Assignment of Claims Act of 1940, as amended, 31 

U.S.C. 3727, 41 U.S.C. 15. 

A true copy of the instrument of assignment executed by the above named applicant on 

(date)______________ is attached. 

The payment due or to become due under the application described above should be made 

payable to the undersigned assignee, provided the undersigned is registered in the Central 

Contractor Registry. 

_________________________________________________ 

Name of Assignee 

_________________________________________________ 

DUNS number of Assignee 

_________________________________________________ 

Address of Assignee 

_________________________________________________ 

Signature of Authorized Representative of Assignee 

_________________________________________________ 

Title of Authorized Representative
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kariema Levy, Appellant.

[723 NYS2d 300]

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her after a jury trial of murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25 [1]), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law former § 265.03), and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [4]). County Court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress the identification testimony. The People met their initial burden of establishing that the conduct of the police was reasonable and that the photo array was not unduly suggestive, and defendant failed to meet her “ultimate burden of proving that the procedure was unduly suggestive” *(People v Chipp,*75 NY2d 327, 335, *cert denied*498 US 833; *see, People v Lee,*207 AD2d 953, *Iv denied*85 NY2d 864). We further note that, although the hairstyles of the women depicted in the photo array are not identical, “[t]he viewer’s attention is not drawn to defendant’s photo in such a way as to indicate that the police were urging a particular selection” *(People v Rogers,*245 AD2d 1041).

*985Defendant has failed to preserve for our review her contentions concerning prosecutorial misconduct during the prosecutor’s opening and closing statements *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to exercise our power to review those contentions as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice *(see,*CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Although we agree with defendant that the prosecutor failed to advise the court as soon as practicable of the testimony of a witness who had come forward with information on the morning of trial, the prosecutor’s delay did not cause “ ‘such substantial prejudice to the defendant that he has been denied due process of law’ ” *(People v Rubin,*101 AD2d 71, 77, *Iv denied*63 NY2d 711).

We conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence *(see, People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495). We further conclude that defendant received effective assistance of counsel *(see, People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 147). We will not second-guess whether defense counsel’s trial strategy “was the best trial strategy, or even a good one, so long as defendant was afforded meaningful representation” *(People v Satterfield,*66 NY2d 796, 799-800). We conclude, however, that the sentence imposed for criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree is illegal. We therefore modify the judgment by reducing the sentence imposed on that count to a term of imprisonment of 2V3 to 7 years. The sentence as modified is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Burke, J. — Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Kehoe, JJ.
THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 

The Honorable Bill Foster 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Congressman Foster: 

May 7, 2014 

Thank you for your letter regarding the application of Norwegian Air International Limited 

(NAI) for authority to conduct U.S. services. 

Given that a number of interested parties have filed responsive pleadings to NAI' s application 

and this matter is currently pending before the Department, I am sure you understand that I 

cannot comment on the merits ofNAI's application. I assure you, however, that we will give full 

and careful consideration to all of the pleadings filed on the record before we reach a 

determination in this matter. 

As is our standard practice, I am placing a copy of your letter and my response in Docket 

DOT-OST-2013-0204, as a contact outside the record ofthis case. You may track the progress 

of this case and view the publicly available documents filed in the docket by accessing the 

Federal Docket Management System at www.regulations.gov and searching for Docket 

DOT-OST-2013-0204. 

I hope this information is helpful. 

~o.re Anthony R. Foxx 
1 224 LONGWORTH H O U SE OFFICE BUI LDIN G 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515 

202-225-35 15 

271 1 EAST N EW YORK STREET, SUITE 204 

AURORA. IL 60502 

630-5 8 5 -7672 

1 95 S PR INGFIELD AVENU E, SUITE 1 02 

JOLIET, IL 60435 

8 15-280-5876 BILL FOSTER 

CONG RESS OF THE UNITED STATES 

1 1 T H DISTRICT, ILLINOIS 

The Honorable Anthony Foxx 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Secretary Foxx: 

February 12, 2014 

COMMITIEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES 

SUBCO MMITTEE ON C APITAL M ARKETS AND 

G OVERNMENT -SPONS O RED ENTERPRIS ES 

SUB COM MITTEE ON 

M O NETARY POLICY A ND T RADE 

I write today to express my reservations regarding Norwegian Air International Limited's (NAI) 

application for a foreign air carrier permit (Docket No. OST-2013-0204). In 2011, the U.S.-E.U. 

Air Transportation Agreement was amended to include Norway. Its inclusion gave NAI's parent 

company the same access to the U.S. market as any E.U. country. However, rather than applying 

as a carrier from its home country, NAI is seeking to fly under the Irish flag in its application for 

a foreign air carrier permit. 

I am concerned that this maneuver is an attempt to evade Norwegian labor laws and use 

permissive Irish regulations to hire low-cost foreign workers in direct competition with U.S. 

airlines. Ifthis permit is approved, we may see this type of regulatory arbitrage become standard 

for European air carriers, further undermining wages and benefits in the industry. 

It would be inadvisable to approve a foreign air carrier permit for a company that is so clearly 

attempting to undercut the labor costs of U.S. carriers. I strongly encourage you to review NAI's 

application with healthy scrutiny and consider the impacts that this arrangement would have on 

jobs in the U.S. air carrier industry. 

s 10-140212-014 

Sincerely, 

BILL FOSTER 

Member of Congress 

FOSTER,HOUSE.GOV 

PRINTED O N REC YC LED PAPER
3DR X8-M Specifications

Autopilot: 3DR Pixhawk V2.4.5

Firmware: ArduCopter 3.2

GPS: 3DR u-blox GPS with Compass (LEA-6H module, 5 Hz update)

Telemetry radio: 3DR Radio v2 (915 mHz or 433 mHz)

Motors: SunnySky V2216-12 800 kV II 

Frame: X

Propellers: APC 11X4.7 SFP (4), APC 11X4.7 SF (4)

Battery: 4S 10000 mAh 10C lithium polymer

Aircraft weight (with battery): 7.7 lbs (3.5 kg)

Aircraft dimensions: 13.7 in x 20.1 in x 11.8 in (35 cm x 51 cm x 30 cm)

Case dimensions: 60.7 in x 14.5 in x 15.5 in (154 cm x 37 cm x 39 cm)

Payload capacity: .4 lbs (200 g)

Radio range: .6 miles* (1 km)

Flight time: 14 min*

Maximum operational wind speed: 25 mph (11 m/s)

Landing accuracy: 8.2 ft (2.5 m)

Recommended flight speed: 11 mph (5 m/s)

Camera: Canon SX260 12.1 megapixel

Camera software: 3DR EAI 1.0

Area coverage (single flight): 25 acres* (0.1 km2)

Orthomosaic accuracy: 3-16 ft (1-5 m)

Ground sampling distance: .7 inches per pixel* (2 cm per pixel)

Image processing software: Pix4Dmapper LT 3DR Edition (Windows only)

*Figures reflect estimated values at ideal operating conditions. Environmental conditions 

can affect flight time, range, area coverage, and ground sampling distance.

v3
#### Jose CABALLERO, Petitioner, v. GENERAL BRONZE et al., Respondents.

No. 43573.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 31, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 23.2 [LETTERHEAD OF MILLER AND LENTS, LTD. APPEARS HERE] February 26, 2008 Hugoton Royalty Trust P.O. Box 830650 Dallas, TX 75283-0650 Re:

          Hugoton Royalty Trust 2007 Annual Report on Form 10-K Gentlemen: The firm of Miller and Lents, Ltd., consents to the references to our firm in the form and context in which they appear and to the use of our report dated February 12, 2008, regarding the Hugoton Royalty Trust Proved Reserves and Future Net Revenue as of December 31, 2007, in the 2007 Annual Report on Form 10-K. We further consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-81849 on Form S-8 of XTO Energy Inc. Miller and Lents, Ltd., has no interests in the Hugoton Royalty Trust or in any affiliated companies or subsidiaries and is not to receive any such interest as payment for such reports and has no director, officer, or employee otherwise connected with Hugoton Royalty Trust. We are not employed by Hugoton Royalty Trust on a contingent basis. Yours very truly, MILLER AND LENTS, LTD. By

          /s/ James C. PearsonJames C. Pearson Chairman
Ex 10.45 - Def Comp Officers






Exhibit 10.45


STATEMENT OF AMENDMENT TO
WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST DEFERRED
COMPENSATION PLAN FOR OFFICERS


The Washington Real Estate Investment Trust Deferred Compensation Plan for Officers (the "Plan") is amended, as set forth below, effective as of January 1, 2014. 


1. By substituting the following for Section 1.8: 


1.8 “Earnings” with respect to a Participant’s Salary Deferral Account means the rate of interest applicable to a Participant’s Salary Deferral Account. The rate shall equal the Company’s weighted average interest rate on its fixed rate bonds as of December 31 of each calendar year. Such rate may be changed to any other rate approved by the Board as of any subsequent January 1. With respect to a Participant’s STI Deferral Accounts and Matching Contribution Accounts which have been deferred and converted into RSUs pursuant to Article III, “Earnings” means the aggregate amount of dividends which would have been paid on a number of Shares equal to the number of RSUs outstanding on such dividend paid date. This amount shall be computed and converted into a number of additional RSUs which shall be credited to such Participant as of the date such dividends are declared. 


2. By substituting the following for Section 4.1: 


4.1 A Participant’s STI Deferral Accounts and Matching Contribution Accounts shall be credited with the cash equivalent of dividends declared on Shares, equal in value to the RSUs allocated to such Accounts, as of the date such dividends are declared. The balance of each Participant’s STI Deferral Account or Matching Contribution Account attributable to dividends credited to such Account under this Section 4.1.3 shall be shall be credited with Earnings, as of the last day of each calendar quarter and at such other times as the Committee may determine in its discretion.




To record its adoption of this Amendment, Washington Real Estate Investment Trust has caused its authorized officers to affix its corporate name and seal. 




	
				
	 
	WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE

	 
	INVESTMENT TRUST

	 
	 
	 

	 
	By:
	/s/ Laura M. Franklin

	 
	 
	 

	 
	Title:
	Executive Vice President Accounting,

	 
	 
	Administration and Corporate Secretary
Rao, Geetha

nN eel

From: Landberg, Christopher A [LandbergCA@state.gov]

Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 11:26 AM

To: ‘Greg.Christopulos@do.treas.gov'; ‘Gay Sills@do.treas.gov'; ‘James. Wallace@do.treas.gov';
"Geetha, Rao@do.treas.gov"

Subject: RE: Enron dispute with India.

Greg,

Yeah, I heard around here last week that Enron was trying to walk back those
comments. [ also heard that the sanctions quote was just a minor comment in
a lengthy interview, but ended up as the headline. I guess controversy

sells papers. chris

——Original Message-——-

From: Greg.Christopulos@do.treas.gov
[mailto:Greg.Christopulos@do.treas.gov]

Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 11:18 AM

To: Gay Sills@do.treas.gov; James. Wallace@do.treas.gov;
Geetha.Rao@do.treas.gov; LandbergCA@State.Gov
Subject: Enron dispute with India.

This morning I talked to John Hardy from Enron about Friday's FT article
about Enron's dispute with the Gov of India and Enron's threats to have the
USG apply sanctions.

Hardy realizes the head of the company was poorly briefed about the
likelihood that the USG would apply sanctions anytime soon. He said Enron
wants to work out a deal and is not trying to escalate the situation right

now.

00500000002242
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-18-00155-CV

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

Appellant

v.

TROY THOELE,

Appellee

From the 12th District Court

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court No. 1828674

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant has filed a “Motion to Dismiss Appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). 

Appellee has filed a pro se “Notice of Dismissal and Motion for Abeyance.” The parties 

explain that this interlocutory appeal is moot because the underlying case has been 

dismissed in its entirety.

Dismissal of this appeal would not prevent a party from seeking relief to which it 

would otherwise be entitled. See id. Appellant’s motion to dismiss is therefore granted. 

Appellee’s motion for abeyance is denied. This appeal is dismissed.
Tex. Dep’t of Crim. Just. v. Thoele Page 2

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and 

Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed July 18, 2018

[CV06]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND NOTES
TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ON PAGES 2 THROUGH 8 OF THE
COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             221
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,591
<ALLOWANCES>                                        40
<INVENTORY>                                      1,564
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,560
<PP&E>                                           5,800
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,145
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,677
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,878
<BONDS>                                          3,267
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        368
<COMMON>                                           779
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,967
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    12,677
<SALES>                                          1,892
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,892
<CGS>                                            1,502
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,639
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     2
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     1
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  94
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     68
<INCOME-TAX>                                        28
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 42
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        42
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .29
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      2230306
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                          0
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          289994
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        370916
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  242649
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3133865
<COMMON>                                           412
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       738833
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             449338
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 1188583
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      22851
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            951252
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                               14306
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                   22000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    40400
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  894473
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  3133865
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       929251
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             85411
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      646983
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      732394
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         196857
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                7273
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  204130
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         66570
<NET-INCOME>                                    137560
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        650
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   136910
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        103900
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        69993
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          221654
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.33
        

</TABLE>